text:
# Zero-metallicity stars

## 1 Introduction

The first generation of stars ever born in the Universe (Population III) is assigned a role of paramount importance for several astrophysical issues. In particular, the formation of a primeval population of very massive objects (VMOs, with initial masses in the range $`10^210^5M_{}`$) was invoked in the ’80s to explain several questions, such as the observed metallicities of Population II stars, the primordial helium abundance, the re-ionisation of cosmic matter after the Big-Bang, the missing mass in clusters of galaxies and galactic haloes, the G-dwarf problem (see Carr et al. 1984 for an extensive review). In those years a few evolutionary calculations of zero-metallicity VMOs were carried out (e.g. Bond et al. 1984, El Eid et al. 1983, Ober et al. 1983, Klapp 1984ab), but afterwards the scientific production on the evolution of the first stars dropped off.

The recently renewed interest in Pop-III stars, essentially driven by the nowadays flourishing of observations at very low metallicity and/or high redshift (refer to e.g. the proceedings of the ESO symposium edit by Weiss et al. (2000); see also Kudritzki et al. (2000), Bromm et al. (2001), Schaerer (2002), Panagia (2002) for extensive analyses on the expected observable properties of primordial stellar populations) has again stimulated the calculation of stellar structures made evolve with initial metal-free chemical composition (e.g. Cassisi et al. 2001; Marigo et al. 2001 and references therein).

Marigo et al. (2001; thereinafter Paper I) presented an extensive study of the evolutionary properties of zero-metallicity stars over a wide range of initial masses ($`0.7M_{}M100M_{}`$). In that work – to which the reader is referred for all the details – we calculated all stellar tracks at constant mass.

Our study on Pop-III stars is now extended to very massive objects (VMOs), with initial masses in the range $`1201000M_{}`$, that is chosen not only for continuity with Paper I, but also in consideration of current theoretical indications that the primordial initial mass function (IMF) might have peaked in the (very) high-mass domain (with $`M100M_{}`$; see e.g. Bromm et al. 1999, 2002; Nakamura & Umemura 2001; Abel et al. 2000).

To this aim we calculate evolutionary models for zero-metallicity VMOs that cover the major core-burning phases, extending from hydrogen to carbon ignition. With aid of available analytic formalisms, we address the question of the possible occurrence of mass loss via stellar winds, which is an important, but still problematic, aspect of stellar evolution at zero metallicity.

In massive stars with “normal” chemical composition the principal driving force resides in the capability of metallic ions, present in the atmosphere, to absorb radiative momentum and transfer it to the outermost layers, that can be then accelerated beyond their escape velocity (Castor et al. 1975; Pauldrach et al. 1986). In a gas composed only of hydrogen and helium, like the primordial one, the lack of metallic ions sets the first important difference and the question arises: Is the radiative acceleration due to the H and He lines strong enough to trigger significant mass loss ? Furthermore, may other possible processes – e.g. related to pulsation instability and stellar rotation – be efficient mechanisms to drive mass loss from Pop-III massive stars ?

Some of these questions have already been addressed by other investigations, others still deserve to be quantitatively analysed and discussed. There are few studies in the literature that present evolutionary models of very massive zero-metallicity stars with mass loss during the pre-supernova phases. In the very massive domain ($`5001000M_{}`$) Klapp (1983, 1984) carried out evolutionary calculations by adopting a simple empirical law for mass-loss (Barlow & Cohen 1977) – based on Galactic observations – that linearly scales with the stellar luminosity. On the basis of semi-analytical models of very massive objects (with masses $`10^210^5M_{}`$), Bond et al. (1984) argued that the same kind of dynamical instability arising in the H-burning shell of Population I models – which should cause the ejection of the entire envelope – might also affect Population III VMOs, depending on the actual abundance of the CNO catalysts in the H-shell. The evolution of zero-metallicity stars (with masses $`80500M_{}`$) during the nuclear phases of H- and He-burning was calculated by El Eid et al. (1983) with the adoption of a semi-empirical relation to derive the mass loss rate (Chiosi 1981). Recently Baraffe et al. (2001, see also Heger et al. 2001) performed a linear stability analysis on metal-free very massive models (with masses $`120500M_{}`$), and investigated the related possibility that mass loss may characterise the pulsation-unstable stages. Heger & Woosley (2002) calculated the evolution and nucleosynthesis of quite massive Population III stars (with masses $`100300M_{}`$) including the final fate of the supernova event, but no mass-loss is assumed to occur during the hydrostatic phases of major nuclear burnings.

In the present work we attempt to further explore the issue of mass loss in primordial conditions, by carrying out new evolutionary calculations of zero-metallicity VMO with recently developed mass-loss formalisms, related to radiation pressure and stellar rotation.

The paper is organised as follows. Section 2 introduces new evolutionary calculations for zero-metallicity VMOs, having initial masses of 120, 250, 500, 750, and 1000 $`M_{}`$. Mass loss is included with the adoption of recent analytic formalisms, namely: Kudritzki (2002) for radiation-driven mass loss, and Maeder & Meynet (2000) for the additional effect of stellar rotation. General characteristics of the models are analysed in relation to energetics, nuclear lifetimes, internal structure, surface and chemical properties. The efficiency of mass loss is discussed on the basis of the adopted formalisms. The corresponding predictions for the chemical yields, ejected via stellar winds, are given in Sect. 3. In particular, the expected helium and metal enrichment, produced by a hypothetical burst of Pop-III star formation, is derived and discussed as a function of the involved parameters. In Sect. 4 we express a few concluding remarks. Finally, stellar isochrones for very young ages are presented in Sect. A.

## 2 Evolutionary calculations

We have carried out evolutionary calculations of zero-metallicity very massive objects (VMO) with initial masses of 120, 250, 500, 750, and 1000 $`M_{}`$. All input physics are the same as those employed in Paper I – to which the reader is referred for all details – except for the applied overshoot scheme. Overshooting is allowed from the borders of the convective cores with the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mathrm{c}=0.5`$ (following Bressan et al. 1981), whereas the classical Schwarzschild criterion is otherwise applied (i.e. convective shells and outer envelope). The evolution is followed starting from the zero-age main sequence (MS) up to the ignition of central carbon, i.e. covering the major stages of hydrogen and helium burning.

In order to estimate the efficiency of mass-loss via stellar winds in primordial VMOs, we adopt recently-developed analytic formalisms (Kudritzki 2002; Maeder & Meyent 2000), whose basic ingredients are summarised in the next sections.

### 2.1 Radiation-driven mass-loss rates

The role of radiation pressure – on the resonance lines of metallic ions like CIII, NeII, OII – in driving mass loss from massive stars has been a firm result of theoretical astrophysics since the pioneer works by Lucy & Solomon (1970), and Castor et al. (1975; CAK). In short, the crucial term determining the efficiency of mass loss by line driven winds is the radiative line acceleration, which is expressed in units of the Thomson acceleration via the so-called force multiplier. This latter, in turn, is suitably parametrised as $`M[t(r)]=kt^\alpha n^\delta `$, where $`t(r)`$ – the Thomson optical depth parameter – is proportional to the number density of electrons, the Thomson cross-section, and the ratio between the local velocity of thermal motion to the spatial gradient of the stellar wind outflow velocity field; $`k`$ represents the normalisation integral over the contribution of all photon absorbing spectral lines with different line strength; $`n`$ is the ratio of the local number density of electrons to the local geometrical dilution factor of the radiation field; and finally $`\alpha `$ and $`\delta `$ are suitable exponents describing the optical depth and density dependence of the radiative line force (see CAK, Abbott 1982a, Pauldrach et al. 1986, Kudritzki, 1988, 1998, 2002 and references therein for more details). The quantities $`k,\alpha ,\delta `$ are known as the force multiplier parameters.

The expected dependence of radiative wind efficiency on metallicity (in the range from solar to 0.01 solar) has been investigated by e.g. Abbott (1982b), Kudritzki et al. (1987), Leitherer et al. (1992), Kudritzki & Puls (2000, and references therein), Vink et al. 2001. The mass-loss rates are predicted to decrease at lower metallicities as a power law following $`(Z/Z_{})^b`$, with $`b=0.50.8`$.

Kudritzki (2002) in his investigation of winds, ionising fluxes and spectra of very massive stars at very low metallicities has recently extended the analysis down to 0.0001 solar. These calculations introduce a new treatment of the radiative line force and are based on revised and updated atomic physics and line lists (see e.g. Puls et al. 2000 and references therein). Following a more realistic consideration of the line strength distribution function, the usual assumption of constant force-multiplier parameters ($`k`$, $`\alpha `$, $`\delta `$) throughout the atmosphere is replaced by the introduction of an explicit dependence of these parameters on optical depth and density. This improved treatment of the line force is needed at extremely low metallicity, because the depth dependence of the radiative acceleration differs significantly from the case of higher metallicity. As a consequence, a new elaborate algorithm to calculate the conditions at the critical point of the wind is also needed.

The results of Kudritzki’s stellar wind calculations are fitted by means of analytic formulas, that give the mass-loss rate as a function of effective temperature, luminosity and metal abundance for very massive stars with masses above 100 $`M_{}`$:

$$\mathrm{log}\dot{M}=q_1([Z][Z_{\mathrm{min}}])^{0.5}+Q_{\mathrm{min}}\mathrm{in}M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1$$
(1)
where we define

$$q_1=Q_0Q_{\mathrm{min}}([Z]_{\mathrm{min}})^{0.5},[Z]=\mathrm{log}(Z/Z_{})$$
(2)
with $`Z`$ being the metallicity (abundance in mass fraction). The quantities $`[Z]_{\mathrm{min}}`$, $`Q_{\mathrm{min}}`$, and $`Q_0`$ are expressed as polynomials of the luminosity, in the form

$$f=a_0+a_1Ł+a_2Ł^2\mathrm{with}Ł=\mathrm{log}(L/L_{})6.0.$$
(3)
The coefficients $`a_i`$ are given as a function of the effective temperature (see table 3 in Kudritki 2002), in the range from 40000 to 60000 K.

The above formalism is applied with the following assumptions:

* At any time the metallicity – that enters Eqs. (1)-(2) – is set $`Z=max(Z_{\mathrm{min}},Z_{\mathrm{eff}})`$. This means that when evaluating the radiative mass-loss rate we do not assume a truly zero metal content, but the maximum between the lowest value in the validity range of Kudritzki’s formula ($`Z_{\mathrm{min}}=10^4\times Z_{}`$), and $`Z_{\mathrm{eff}}=1XY`$. This latter denotes the effective current metallicity, with $`X`$ and $`Y`$ being the hydrogen and helium abundances, respectively. In this way we may account, to a first approximation, for any possible surface enrichment in metals (mainly CNO elements, such that $`Z_{\mathrm{eff}}>Z_{\mathrm{min}}`$) exposed to the surface by stellar winds or convective mixing.
* For $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}>60000`$ K, we choose not to extrapolate the fit formula beyond its validity domain, but constrain $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=min(T_{\mathrm{eff}},60000)`$. It should be noticed that most of the main-sequence lifetime of VMOs is spent at $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}>60000`$.

### 2.2 Effect of rotation

As shown by e.g. Friend & Abbott (1986) and Pauldrach et al. (1986), radiative mass-loss rates are enhanced by rotation by a factor that depends on the ratio, $`v_{\mathrm{rot}}/v_{\mathrm{crit}}`$, between the rotational velocity (usually taken at the equator), and the critical or break-up velocity. This latter is defined by the vanishing of the net radial acceleration contributed by the gravitational, radiative, and centrifugal forces.

In our work we apply the analytic recipe presented in Maeder & Meynet (2000, and earlier works of the series referenced therein), where the results of a detailed quantitative analysis of stellar rotation are conveniently synthesised. According to Maeder & Meynet’s scheme, the mass-loss rate from a rotating star can be expressed as a function of the purely radiative $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{rad}}`$, and the rotational correction factor:

$$\dot{M}(v_{\mathrm{rot}})=F_\mathrm{\Omega }\times \dot{M}_{\mathrm{rad}}(v_{\mathrm{rot}}=0),$$
(4)
with the correction factor given by

$$F_\mathrm{\Omega }=\frac{(1\mathrm{\Gamma })^{\frac{1}{\alpha }1}}{[1(T_\mathrm{\Omega }+\mathrm{\Gamma })]^{\frac{1}{\alpha }1}},$$
(5)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the Eddington factor for electron screening opacity, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the angular velocity, $`\rho _\mathrm{m}`$ is the internal mean density, and $`\alpha `$ is the force multiplier parameter corresponding to the slope of the line strength distribution.

The effect of rotation is contained in the term

$$T_\mathrm{\Omega }=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{2\pi G\rho _m}\frac{4}{9}\frac{v_{\mathrm{rot}}^2}{v_{\mathrm{crit}}^2},$$
(6)
where the break-up velocity is evaluated as

$$v_{\mathrm{crit}}=\left(\frac{2}{3}\frac{GM}{R}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}$$
(7)
with clear meaning of the quantities.

We refer to the classical $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-limit when the centrifugal acceleration balances the gravitational one, that is when $`v_{\mathrm{rot}}=v_{\mathrm{crit}}`$ and the effects of radiation can be neglected. This is not the case of VMOs, as they are characterised by large Eddington factors. The so-called $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limit applies, instead, when the effects of both radiation and rotation concur to balance the gravitational acceleration. This corresponds mathematically to the divergency of the factor $`F_\mathrm{\Omega }`$, that is when the denominator of Eq. (5) vanishes.

It is worth noticing that for $`v_{\mathrm{rot}}=v_{\mathrm{crit}}`$, the denominator of Eq. (5) becomes $`[0.361\mathrm{\Gamma }]^{\frac{1}{\alpha }1}`$ and the $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limit could be met for values $`\mathrm{\Gamma }0.639`$, that is for luminosities fainter than the Eddington limit. Viceversa, if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }>0.639`$, the $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limit could be already reached for rotational velocities lower than $`v_{\mathrm{crit}}`$, that is below the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-limit.

If $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limit is attained, then Eq. (4) becomes meaningless, and the theory does not indicate any straightforward simple treatment for such critical occurrence. For the sake of simplicity, we handle this circumstance by assuming a constant value for the mass-loss rate, $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{crit}}`$, its value being a free parameter to be specified in our calculations.

The evolution of the rotational velocity $`v_{\mathrm{rot}}=\mathrm{\Omega }(R)\times R`$ (where $`R`$ is the surface radius) is derived under simple assumptions, namely:

* Spherical symmetry
* Rigid-body rotation, $`\mathrm{\Omega }(r)=\mathrm{\Omega }`$
* Conservation of the current total angular momentum over any evolutionary time step
* The equations of stellar structures are kept unchanged, i.e. without including any rotational term.

In summary, we proceed as follows. Let us suppose that at a given time $`t`$ the total angular momentum of the star is

$$(\mathrm{\Omega })=\mathrm{\Omega }\times 𝒥,$$
(8)
where

$$𝒥=\frac{8\pi }{3}_0^R\rho (r)r^4dr$$
(9)
is the moment of inertia of the stellar sphere. All quantities, like the stratification in radial coordinate $`r`$, density $`\rho `$ and surface radius $`R`$, are evaluated at $`t`$.

If during the evolutionary time step, $`\delta t=t^{}t`$, the star has lost a shell of mass $`\delta M`$, comprised between radii $`\overline{r}`$ and $`R`$, then the total angular momentum at time $`t^{}`$ is given:

$`^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}\times {\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{3}}{\displaystyle _0^R^{}}\rho ^{}(r^{})r_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}dr^{}`$
$`=`$ $`(\mathrm{\Omega })\mathrm{\Omega }\times {\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{3}}{\displaystyle _{\overline{r}}^R}\rho (r)r^4dr`$
where all primed quantities are now referred to time $`t^{}`$.

In this way we can account for the decrease of the total angular momentum due to mass loss (see Heger & Langer 1998), as well as the effects of possible spinning-up (slowing-down) of rotation due to contraction (expansion) of the star.

The free rotation parameters to be specified before calculating each model are: i) the initial rotational velocity $`v_{\mathrm{rot},0}`$, and ii), the force multiplier parameter $`\alpha `$, and the critical mass loss rate $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{crit}}`$ at the $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limit. In our calculations we adopt $`v_{\mathrm{rot},0}=500`$ km $`s^1`$; $`\alpha =0.1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.4}`$; and $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{crit}}=10^3M_{}`$ yr-1.

We set $`\alpha `$ lower than the standard value of $`2/3`$ valid for hydrogenic ions since, according to Kudritzki (2002), $`\alpha `$ is found to decrease at decreasing metallicities. We notice that the lower $`\alpha `$, the larger the correction factor due to rotation $`F_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (see Eq. (5)). However, since our results for the case $`\alpha =0.1`$ do not substantially differ from those for $`\alpha =0.4`$, we will show and discuss only these latter.

Finally, we choose to set $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{crit}}`$ of the same order of magnitude as the very large mass-loss rates measured in Luminous Blue Variables (LBV), yellow and blue super-giants (see e.g. Leitherer 1997).

### 2.3 General characteristics

Let us now first consider the general features that characterise the evolution of zero-metallicity VMOs, and then move to discuss the efficiency of mass loss.

It is well known that in stars originally lacking in CNO elements the (pre-)main sequence gravitational contraction of the central regions may proceed to such an extent that the density and temperature conditions allow the ignition of the triple$`\alpha `$ reaction, with consequent activation of the CNO-cycle. In stars with $`M\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}20}M_{}`$, the first occurrence of the triple$`\alpha `$ reaction usually takes place after core H-burning has already started via the p-p reactions, the time delay between the two events reducing at increasing stellar mass. Eventually, in more massive stars, with $`M\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}20}M_{}`$, the first synthesis of primary 12C is practically simultaneous with the onset of core H-burning, which proceeds via the CNO cycle since the very initial stages.

This is illustrated in Fig. 1, showing the primary CNO and 12C abundances in the convective core at the beginning of H-burning, as a function of the initial stellar mass. It is worth noticing that $`X(\mathrm{CNO})X(^{14}`$N), because as soon as the triple-$`\alpha `$ reaction produces some 12C, most of it is immediately burnt into 14N, given the high temperatures at which the CNO-cycle operates. For $`M\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}20}M_{}`$, the total $`X`$(CNO) has already grown to $`10^{10}10^9`$, which guarantees the primary role of the CNO-cycle as nuclear energy source for the star during the whole main sequence phase (see Paper I). The abrupt drop of $`X`$(CNO) at lower masses indicates that the full activation of the CNO-cycle is delayed to later stages of H-burning, initially proceeding via the p-p reactions (see also figure 5 in Paper I).

Various model predictions for relevant quantities are presented in Table 1. Let us first consider the nuclear lifetimes of core H- and He-burning ($`\tau _\mathrm{H}`$ and $`\tau _{\mathrm{He}}`$) as a function of the initial stellar mass. In both cases the trend is initially decreasing at larger masses, until it flattens out towards a nearly constant value of roughly $`2\times 10^6`$ yr for $`\tau _\mathrm{H}`$ and $`2\times 10^5`$ yr for $`\tau _{\mathrm{He}}`$, towards the most massive models ($`M500M_{}`$). It is worth briefly recalling the reason for this, with the aid of approximate scaling relations (see Kippenhahn & Weigert 1994), e.g. the definition of the nuclear H-burning lifetime, $`\tau _\mathrm{H}M/L`$, and the mass-luminosity relation, $`LM^\eta `$, so that $`\tau _\mathrm{H}M^{1\eta }`$. As the exponent $`\eta `$ is typically 3-3.5 (say in the range from about 1 to 100 $`M_{}`$), the nuclear lifetime is expected to decrease at increasing stellar mass. The almost invariance of $`\tau _\mathrm{H}`$ seen at very large masses is the result of the growing contribution of radiation to the total pressure, which makes the mass-luminosity relation approach a linear proportionality ($`\eta 1`$ and $`LM`$), so that $`\tau _\mathrm{H}const`$.

One common feature of the VMO models is the development of very large convective cores during both the H- and He-burning phase, with a typical fractional extension amounting to 70 – 90 $`\%`$ of the total mass. Moreover, at the exhaustion of hydrogen in the core central convection does not disappear, and the onset of core He-burning immediately follows because of the already high temperatures attained ($`\mathrm{log}T8.28.3`$). This implies that the intermediate phase of H-shell burning is not expected for these stars.

Two examples are illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3, that show the evolution of both convective and burning regions in two models with initial masses of $`250M_{}`$ and $`1000M_{}`$, for two choices of the mass-loss prescription. From these plots we can already see that new products synthesised by nuclear burnings may be exposed to the stellar surface because of i) the inward penetration of the convective envelope across a chemical profile left by the gradual recession of the convective core, and/or ii) the progressive peeling of the stars due to mass loss. This point will be discussed in more detail in the following sections.

Figure 4 displays the evolutionary tracks in the H-R diagram for the two sets of VMOs, calculated adopting the prescriptions for purely radiative and rotational-radiative mass loss, respectively. In all cases central H-burning is mostly spent at high effective temperatures, regardless the efficiency of mass loss. We can notice that the locus of points describing the onset of core He-burning (practically coincident with the end of core H-burning) bends towards lower $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ at increasing stellar mass. On the other hand, the He-burning phase takes place in different regions of the H-R diagram, depending on stellar mass and mass loss. Soon after the onset of He-burning, models with $`120M_{}M750`$ are able to reach their Hayashi line, where they remain up to central carbon ignition. The evolution of models with $`M=1000M_{}`$ takes place entirely at high effective temperatures, essentially due significant mass loss. Next section will examine this aspect in mode detail.

Finally, Fig. 8 shows the expected behaviour of the mass of the He- and CO- core at the stage of central carbon ignition, as a function of the initial mass in the domains of massive and very massive stars ($`8M_{}M1000M_{}`$). The relation is almost linear, without any important effect due to mass loss. Our predictions indicate that the interval $`M_{\mathrm{He}}=64`$ to $`133M_{}`$, which would produce pair-instability supernovae according to Heger & Woosley (2002)’s recent calculations, correspond to stellar progenitors with initial masses $`M=127`$ to $`252M_{}`$ (see also El Eid et al. 1983, Ober et al. 1983, Bond et al. 1984, Carr et al. 1984).

### 2.4 Mass-loss efficiency

We will discuss now the efficiency of mass loss in relation to the two driving mechanisms here considered, namely: radiation (Sect. 2.1) and rotation (Sect. 2.2). Stellar ejecta are presented in Table 1.

#### Models with $`\dot{M}=\dot{M}_{\mathrm{rad}}`$.

In general, the purely-radiative mass-loss rates remain quite low during the whole evolution of VMO models with $`M<500M_{}`$. For instance, the 120 $`M_{}`$ model returns only 0.02 $`M_{}`$ to the interstellar medium. In this mass range, the general properties are practically the same ones as those predicted for constant-mass evolution. As reasonable extrapolation we could expect that at lower masses ($`<120M_{}`$, hence lower luminosities), the inefficiency of mass loss should even more marked, which supports the scenario of constant-mass evolution of Pop-III stars discussed in Paper I. Another common characteristic of the models with $`M=120500M_{}`$ is the morphology of the tracks in the H-R diagram, and hence the location of major nuclear burnings. Actually, if the H-burning phase is spent in regions of high effective temperature (typically at $`\mathrm{log}T_{\mathrm{eff}}4.85.0`$), the subsequent He-burning phase takes place far away from there, as the star evolves along its Hayashi line (typically at $`\mathrm{log}T_{\mathrm{eff}}3.73.8`$). Indeed, the tracks of models with $`M<500M_{}`$ are characterised by quite a large excursion in $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, that is performed at almost constant luminosity.

Similar considerations on the morphology of the tracks in the H-R diagram apply to the $`750M_{}`$ model as well, though in this case the efficiency of mass loss is somewhat more significant, the total ejecta amounting to about $`20\%`$ of the initial mass (see Table 1).

A different behaviour characterises the most massive model here considered, with $`M=1000M_{}`$. In this case, radiative mass loss is predicted to be strong since the very beginning of the MS phase, due to the combination of large luminosities and effective temperatures. The entire evolution is confined in regions of the H-R diagram of high effective temperatures, and the corresponding stellar ejecta up to the central carbon ignition are considerable, reaching to more than half the initial mass.

The net result is that radiation-driven stellar winds do not produce appreciable mass loss from massive zero-metallicity stars, except for the most massive models, with $`M>750M_{}`$. Our finding supports previous indications in this sense by Kudritzki (2000) and Bromm et al. (2001).

It is worth making a final remark by looking at Fig. 5, which displays the degree of chemical self-pollution at the surface, in terms of CNO abundance, produced by the combined effect of mass loss and convective mixing. As we see in most models the maximum enrichment does not exceed $`10^910^8`$, that is the critical CNO abundance required in stars with original metal-free composition to fully activate the CNO-cycle as dominant energy source (see Sect. 2.3 and Fig. 1). This occurs when the mass-loss front is only able to penetrate into the chemical profile generated by the recession of the convective core during the MS phase, as it is the case of the 500 and 750 $`M_{}`$ models. Models with lower masses, 120 and 250 $`M_{}`$, show comparable self-enrichment, that is however reached after the end of the He-burning phase, not as a consequence of mass loss but because of deep convective dredge-up while on the Hayashi line. It follows that such degree of surface chemical enrichment should not produce enough resonant metal lines in the atmosphere to activate efficient radiation-driven mass-loss.

On the contrary, the most massive 1000 $`M_{}`$ model exhibits a remarkable increase of the CNO abundance during the He-burning phase, due to the progressive reduction of the stellar mass. As shown in Fig. 3 the H-burning shell is extinguished and eventually, close to the exhaustion of central helium, the mass-loss front penetrates into regions previously reached by convective core. Then, significant amounts of carbon and oxygen are exposed at the surface ($`X`$(CNO)$`0.6`$). Whenever this circumstance may trigger substantial radiative mass-loss is an interesting point to be considered, and it would deserve a dedicated study in the framework of the radiation-driven-winds theory. Finally, it is worth remarking that an additional chemical pollution of the stellar surface may be caused by rotationally-induced mixing (e.g. Heger & Langer 2000; Meynet & Maeder 2002), which is not taken into account in the present analysis.

#### Models with $`\dot{M}=\dot{M}(v_{\mathrm{rot}})`$.

The amplification effect on mass loss due to stellar rotation turns out rather limited. As we can see, the evolutionary tracks in bottom panel of Fig. 4 are almost indistinguishable from those in the top panel. Actually, the total ejecta are larger than those for models with radiative rates, but not such to drastically alter the evolutionary properties just presented.

To better understand the results we refer to Figs. 6 and 7, showing the evolution of rotational parameters and mass-loss rates. In both cases the correction factor $`F_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (Eqs. (4) and (5)) keeps close to one during nearly the whole MS phase, so that the mass-loss rate remains quite low ($`10^8M_{}`$ yr-1).

Eventually, during the stages just preceding and following the H-consumption in the core, the 120 $`M_{}`$ model reaches both the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limits at the same time. This result is supported by recent analyses of rotating stars at low metallicities. In fact, as discussed by Meynet & Maeder (2002) the approach of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limit is just favoured in massive and luminous stars at very low- or even zero metallicity. This circumstance should be the consequence of two concurring factors, namely: i) the nearly total conservation of the initial angular momentum during the almost constant-mass evolutionary stages, that would lead to the natural settling of the break-up rotation, hence the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-limit; and ii) the large values of the Eddington factor in massive and luminous stars. In practice, both factors favour the divergency of the correction factor given by Eq. (5).

With respect to the former point i), we recall that various analyses (e.g. Heger & Langer 1998, 2000; Meyner & Maeder 2000, Maeder & Meynet 2001) have shown that a massive star evolving at (nearly) constant mass could approach or even reach the break-up rotation, towards the end of the MS phase (or in a blue-loop off the Hayashi line). In fact during these stages, the progressive stellar contraction would result in increasing surface rotational velocities (the so-called “spin-up phases”). This is exactly what we find in our 120 $`M_{}`$ model displayed in Fig. 6. At this stage the stellar mass is practically the same ($`119.98M_{}`$) as the initial one.

However this critical regime, that we describe by assuming an extremely high mass-loss rate $`M_{\mathrm{crit}}`$, is maintained only for very short. In fact, the reduction of total angular momentum carried away by the outermost ejected layers, and the increase of the radius due to the subsequent expansion (following the beginning of core He-burning) make rotation to slow down (see bottom-left panel of Fig. 6), with consequent departure from the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limits.

Then, the star evolves rapidly towards lower effective temperatures onto its Hayashi line, which causes a further drastic decrease of the rotational velocity. The total ejecta with the inclusion of the rotational effect is almost negligible, $`1.5M_{}`$ (see Table 1).

A similar behaviour is found for the $`500M_{}`$ model. However, in this case the larger luminosity concurs to lead the star closer to the $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limit already during the MS phase. Then, the radiative mass-loss rate is enhanced by a few times (see top-right panel of Fig. 7). Again, the $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limit (but not the $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$-limit) is briefly touched during the spin-up phase towards the end of the MS phase, but soon after abandoned because of the loss of angular momentum and the expansion of the star. Compared to the model with the same initial mass but with radiative mass loss, the net effect of rotation is to increase the total ejecta by roughly a factor of two, which still remains very small (see Table 1).

At larger masses ($`M=750,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1000}M_{}`$) the effect of rotation turns out even weaker. In fact, for these models the radiation-driven mass loss becomes efficient, which leads to the removal of a significant part of the original angular momentum already during the MS, hence preventing the approaching of the critical $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limits.

### 2.5 Cautionary remarks

At this point it is worth making a few cautionary remarks about the assumptions and simplifications adopted in our work to describe the effect of mass loss in primordial massive stars.

As far as the radiative mass-loss is concerned (Sect. 2.1), it should be pointed out that the position $`Z=max(Z_{\mathrm{min}},Z_{\mathrm{eff}})`$ and the treatment for $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}>60000`$ K may lead to over-estimate the actual mass-loss rates, since for instance the minimum metallicity, $`Z_{\mathrm{min}}10^6`$, is typically two orders of magnitude larger than $`Z_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, (except for the 1000 $`M_{}`$ model). Moreover, the application of the formula for $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{rad}}`$ to models with $`M>500M_{}`$ requires to extrapolate the predictions above the upper-limit in luminosity (i.e. $`\mathrm{log}(L/L_{})=7.03`$) of the validity domain.

The simplifying assumption at this stage, without calculations for $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}>60000`$ K and $`\mathrm{log}(L/L_{})>7.03`$ available, is that the line force parametrisation at higher temperatures and luminosities is still reasonably approximated in this way. New calculations extending the temperature and luminosity domains are certainly needed for the future.

As far as the rotational mass-loss is concerned (Sect. 2.2), we recall that the results are obtained in the ambit of a very simplified description of stellar rotation (mainly due to the assumption of solid-body rotation). It is clear that a strictly correct procedure should consider important processes like meridional circulation, shears, and horizontal turbulence, which would also determine a feed-back on stellar structure (see e.g. Kippenhahn & Thomas 1970; Meynet & Maeder 1997). Among the main related effects, it turns out that the outward transportation of angular momentum from the central regions by meridional circulation would produce a differential rotation. These aspects are not included in the present work.

Rather, our assumption of solid-body rotation would ideally correspond to the case of maximum efficiency of convection and shears in the transport of angular momentum from the inner to the outer regions of the star. In this way even a relatively small loss of material from the surface leads to a substantial loss of the total angular momentum, and consequently to the slow-down of rotation.

On the other hand, in the context of a detailed treatment of rotation – coupled to stellar structure and including also the role of meridional circulation – we may expect that the outward transport of angular momentum is less efficient. In fact, detailed computations accounting for differential rotation (e.g. Meynet & Maeder 2000, 2002) indicate that i) the angular velocity increases progressively with time towards the centre, and ii) the break-up rotation could be reached earlier and maintained for longer periods. Moreover, the possible effect of anisotropic mass loss (Maeder 2002) could further reduce the loss of angular momentum and lead to earlier break-up. Finally, two additional effects are expected to gain increasing importance at lower metallicity, namely: i) faster core rotation and more efficient rotational mixing (Meynet & Maeder 2002), and ii) possibly larger initial rotational velocities (Maeder et al. 1999).

These considerations lead to the possibility that the combined effects of rotation and mass loss may be somewhat under-estimated in our calculations.

It follows that the inclusion of all these aspects might produce different results compared to those presented in this paper. However, since up to now there is no dedicated analysis addressing such issues specifically for Pop-III stars, we believe that our simplified exploration of the effect of rotation on primordial stars should keep its own validity.

## 3 The stellar yields

If ever formed, massive primordial stars marked the first step in the chemical evolution of the Universe (e.g. Oh et al. 2001; Scannapieco et al. 2002). The efficiency of their contribution to the chemical enrichment of the pristine gas depends essentially on two factors, namely: the individual stellar yields, and the details of the IMF.

As for the former ingredients, predictions of elemental yields are available in Woosley & Weaver (1995) for supernovae II explosions produced by zero-metallicity stars with initial masses in the range $`1140M_{}`$, and in Heger & Woosley (2002) for pair-instability supernovae, involving helium core masses in the range $`64133M_{}`$ (corresponding to initial stellar masses of $`140260M_{}`$ under the hypothesis of constant-mass pre-supernova evolution). According to the latter work, at both lower and larger masses, no explosive nucleosynthesis should be injected into the primordial interstellar medium (ISM) but, rather, trapped into black holes. For past works on pair-instability supernovae the reader could refer to El Eid et al. (1983), Ober et al. (1983), Bond et al. (1984), Carr et al. (1984).

In their evolutionary calculations at initial zero metallicity Woosley & Weaver (1995) and Heger & Woosley (2002) did not consider any mass loss during the hydrostatic phases (except for that driven by pair-instability pulsation). Past calculations of the wind contributions from VMOs can be found in the works by El Eid et al. (1982), Klapp (1983,1984), and more recently Portinari et al. (1998). These latter estimates are based on the results of semi-analytic stellar models developed by Bond et al. (1984). Our predictions of the wind ejecta from Pop-III VMOs are given in Table 1 that presents, for each model with initial mass $`M`$, the net wind yields (in $`M_{}`$) of 4He, 12C, 14N, and 16O, the total ejecta $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{\mathrm{ej}}`$, and the masses of the He-core ($`M_{\mathrm{He}}`$) and C-core ($`M_\mathrm{C}`$) at the ignition of central carbon. For the sake of completeness, the results are grouped on the basis of the adopted mass-loss prescriptions, namely: purely-radiative mass loss, and radiative-rotational mass-loss. However, the differences between the two sets of yields are quite small (see Sect. 2.4).

It turns out that the wind yields ejected by VMOs are practically negligible for all masses, except for the two most massive models here considered, with $`M=750,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1000}M_{}`$. For instance, the 1000 $`M_{}`$ model with $`v_{\mathrm{rot},0}=500`$ km s-1 ejects about $`17\%`$ of its initial mass as newly synthesized helium, and $`11.5M_{}`$ in form of carbon and oxygen. In this particular case (see Fig. 3), during the MS phase the mass-loss front eats up the chemical profile left by the receding convective core and the wind ejecta, returned to the ISM, are mainly enriched in 4He and 14N. Then, during the subsequent He-burning phase, the deep peeling keeps going on to such an extent that, after the ejection of the entire hydrogenic envelope (when the abundance of central helium is $`0.03`$), the mass-loss front extends beyond the extinguished H-burning shell, eventually exposing to the surface the nuclear products of partial core He-burning, mainly 12C and 16O. However, the net yields of these elements are not extremely large, given the short evolutionary time-scales involved from that stage up to the central carbon ignition (i.e. the end of calculations).

### 3.1 Chemical enrichment and primordial $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$

The extent of helium enrichment, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y`$, supplied by Pop-III stars in the very early stages of cosmic chemical evolution, is a potentially important issue for its possible cosmologic implications. For instance, the age of Globular Clusters (GC), as inferred from observations, depends sensitively on the assumed initial helium abundance $`Y_\mathrm{p}`$, which is commonly thought to sample the primordial Big Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN). Typically, an increment of the fractional mass abundance $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y_\mathrm{p}=0.02`$ would produce an age decrement of roughly $`15\%`$, that is of the order of 2 Gyr within the range $`1015`$ Gyr (see e.g. Shi 1995). Moreover, the relative enrichment of helium with respect to that of metals – the so-called $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$ – produced by Pop-III stars, could largely differ from that derived – both theoretically and observationally – at non-zero metallicities, so that the usually adopted linear extrapolation down to $`Z=0`$ to infer the primordial helium abundance may lead to misleading results.

Another cosmological issue is related to the nature itself of the dark matter present in galactic haloes and clusters. The standard hot BBN predicts an upper limit to the baryonic density parameter, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{BBN}}<0.06h_{50}^2`$ (where $`h_{50}`$ is the Hubble constant in units of 50 km $`s^1`$ Mpc-1; see e.g. Kernan & Krauss 1994), that is already lower than the present density parameter inferred from dynamical estimates of virialized systems, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{dyn}}0.10.2`$ (e.g. Dekel 1994). This discrepancy could be solved – without losing, at the same time, the consistency between BBN predictions and the observed elemental abundances (like those of deuterium and lithium) at the lowest metallicities – by invoking that the bulk of dark matter is in a non-baryonic, still unknown, form. This is the commonly accepted picture.

An alternative scenario might arise from the assumption that, instead, dark matter was made of baryons, e.g. in form of the remnants of pre-galactic stars. Were this the case, the immediate dramatic consequence would be that we should abandon the standard BBN, and ascribe the first synthesis of light elements, like deuterium and helium, as well as the photon microwave background to another source. Bond et al. (1983) and Carr et al. (1984) pointed at Pop-III very massive stars as potential candidates, and investigated the extreme possibility that these stars synthesised a substantial fraction, or even the totality, of primordial helium. In that case, a related constraint is that the accompanying metal enrichment does not exceed the upper limits set e.g. by the metallicities measured in Population I and II stars.

In order to derive an updated picture of the aforementioned aspects on the basis of the present results, we have calculated the helium and metal enrichments produced by a population of (very) massive zero-metallicity stars, with $`10M_{}M8\times 10^4M_{}`$. No other sources are considered, such as the wind yields from low- and intermediate-mass stars in the Asymptotic Giant Branch (AGB) phase (with $`0.7M_{}M8M_{}`$). In other words, we assume that the primordial initial mass function favoured the formation of massive objects, a hypothesis that is supported by current models of primeval cloud fragmentation (e.g. Bromm et al. 1999, 2002; Nakamura & Umemura 2001; Abel et al. 2000). The choice of $`8\times 10^4M_{}`$ as maximum mass value is motivated by the indications that above this limit stars are not expected to experience static nuclear burnings because of post-Newtonian instabilities, and the chemical enrichment from these super-massive objects should be small (Fricke 1973, Ober 1979; see also Ober et al. 1983).

In summary, we account for the chemical contributions from three groups of stars, namely: i) massive objects (MOs) with masses of 12-40 $`M_{}`$, that experience no steady mass loss and undergo SN II explosions; and ii) VMOs with initial masses of 120-260 $`M_{}`$, that may experience mass loss via stellar winds and pair-instability SN explosions; and iii) VMOs with initial masses of $`2608\times 10^4M_{}`$ that may suffer mass loss during the hydrostatic phases, before collapsing into black holes. As for the MOs, we adopt the supernova yields at $`Z=0`$ calculated by Woosley & Weaver (1995). For the VMOs with initial masses of 120-1000 $`M_{}`$, we combine our estimated wind contributions with the supernova yields (if non zero) by Heger & Woosley (2002). The matching between the wind and SN yields is performed as a function of the helium core mass as tabulated in Heger & Woosley (2002). Finally, for stars more massive than 1000 $`M_{}`$, we adopt simple analytical prescriptions to estimate the helium and metal yields ejected by steady mass loss over the hydrostatic hydrogen-burning phase. Following Bond et al. (1984) we assume the maximum possible helium yield, which is expressed as a function of the initial electron molecular weight (their equation 27). The corresponding metal enrichment is obtained by multiplying an average CNO abundance (newly synthesised during the core hydrogen-burning, typically $`X(\mathrm{CNO})10^910^8`$, see Sect. 2.1) by the amount of ejected mass (derived by equating their equations 24 and 27). With our choices for the primordial hydrogen and helium abundances ($`X_0=0.77`$, and $`Y_0=0.23`$ respectively), we obtain the fractional yields – normalised to the initial stellar mass – for objects with $`M>1000M_{}`$:

| $`y(^4\mathrm{He})/M`$ | = | 0.17 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| $`y(\mathrm{CNO})/M`$ | = | 0.435 $`\times X(\mathrm{CNO})`$ |

In our calculations we assume $`X(\mathrm{CNO})=10^8`$.

In a similar manner as in Ober et al. (1983), a very simple chemical model is assumed: stars formed in a single burst from a primeval cloud, that is assimilated to a closed box system, chemical enrichment is considered instantaneous with the burst and homogenised throughout the gas.

The basic free parameters that define our model are: the fraction of the primordial cloud, with original mass $`M_0`$, globally consumed in the burst of star formation, $`f_\mathrm{s}=M_\mathrm{s}/M_0`$, and the details of primordial IMF (in number of stars per unit mass interval):

$$\varphi (M)=𝒜M^x\mathrm{for}M_{\mathrm{low}}MM_{\mathrm{up}},$$
(11)
where $`x`$ is the slope of the assumed power law ($`x=2.35`$ describes the classical Salpeter relation); $`M_{\mathrm{low}}`$, $`M_{\mathrm{up}}`$ correspond to the minimum and maximum values of the initial stellar mass, respectively.

The quantity $`𝒜`$ in Eq. (11) must satisfy the condition

$`M_\mathrm{s}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{M_{\mathrm{low}}}^{M_{\mathrm{up}}}}M\varphi (M)𝑑M=𝒜{\displaystyle _{M_{\mathrm{low}}}^{M_{\mathrm{up}}}}M^{1x}𝑑M`$
$`=`$ $`𝒜\times \xi `$
Denoting with $`\mathrm{\Delta }^\mathrm{W}(M)`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{\mathrm{SN}}(M)`$ the masses of the ejecta contributed by a star with initial mass $`M`$ via stellar winds and supernova explosions, respectively, then the final mass of the cloud, left in form of gas after the burst of star formation, is

$`M_\mathrm{f}`$ $`=`$ $`M_0M_\mathrm{s}+𝒜{\displaystyle _{M_{\mathrm{low}}}^{M_{\mathrm{up}}}}[\mathrm{\Delta }^\mathrm{W}(M)+\mathrm{\Delta }^{\mathrm{SN}}(M)]M^x𝑑M`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`M_0M_\mathrm{s}+𝒜\times `$
Analogously, the final mass of the cloud in form of any given element $`j`$ can derived from

$`M_j`$ $`=`$ $`(M_0M_\mathrm{s})X_{j,0}+𝒜{\displaystyle _{M_{\mathrm{low}}}^{M_{\mathrm{up}}}}\{y_j^\mathrm{W}(M)+y_j^{\mathrm{SN}}(M)`$
$`+`$ $`[\mathrm{\Delta }^\mathrm{W}(M)+\mathrm{\Delta }^{\mathrm{SN}}(M)]X_{j,0}\}M^xdM`$
$`=`$ $`(M_0M_\mathrm{s})X_{j,0}+𝒜\times _j`$
where $`X_{j,0}`$ denotes the initial abundance of the element $`j`$, $`y_j^\mathrm{W}(M)`$ and $`y_j^{\mathrm{SN}}(M)`$ are the corresponding yields (in mass units) due to stellar winds and SN explosion, respectively. In Eqs. (13) and (3.1) the quantities $`R`$ and $`R_j`$ are a measure of the integrated efficiency of the primordial stellar population in terms of restitution to the ISM of gas, and elemental abundances, respectively.

Finally, after simple algebraic passages, we estimate the fractional abundance (by mass) of the element $`j`$ in the gas resulting from the chemical enrichment by Pop-III stars:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }X_j=X_jX_{j,0}=\frac{M_j}{M_\mathrm{f}}X_{j,0}=\frac{f_\mathrm{s}(_jX_{j,0})}{(1f_\mathrm{s})\xi +f_\mathrm{s}}$$
(15)
We apply the above formula to derive the global enrichment of helium, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y`$, and metals $`\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$ produced by a Pop-III burst of star formation. We set $`Y_0=0.23`$ and $`Z_0=0`$. The results can be analysed as a function of the efficiency of star formation (expressed by the parameter $`f_\mathrm{s}`$), and different choices of the IMF. Figures 9 and 10 show few illustrative examples, that bracket the widest variability range of the results for different combinations of the model parameters. In practice we consider five cases, namely: i)–ii) classical Salpeter IMF (with $`x=2.35`$) over the mass intervals $`101000M_{}`$ and $`108\times 10^4M_{}`$; iii)–iv) Salpeter-like but flatter IMF (with $`x=1.5`$) with the inclusion of VMOs only, over the mass intervals $`1201000M_{}`$ and $`1208\times 10^4M_{}`$; and v) the same as the previous cases but for a very narrow mass range at about $`1000M_{}`$.

As for the helium enrichment, illustrated in Fig. 9, we can make the following remarks. In all cases, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y`$ increases with the efficiency of star formation such that an amount of helium, comparable with the primordial value predicted by standard BBN, could be produced by Pop-III massive stars if $`f_\mathrm{s}1`$. This finding is in agreement with the results by Bond et al. (1983). However, leaving aside this extreme and unlikely condition, we notice in Fig. 9 that, at any $`f_\mathrm{s}`$, the largest contributions come under the assumption of an extremely top-heavy IMF either narrowly peaked at $`1000M_{}`$ (short-dashed line), or including the contribution of super-massive objects up to $`8\times 10^4M_{}`$ (long-dashed line).

In these particular cases a helium enrichment already of the order of $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y0.01`$, hence able to affect the age determination of GCs, may be attained for $`f_\mathrm{s}0.050.1`$. Interestingly, these are typical values of the star formation efficiency as indicated by hydrodynamical models of structure and galaxy formation (e.g. Abel et al. 1999; Kawata 2001; Chiosi & Carraro 2002), and chemical evolution of the intra-cluster medium (Moretti et al. 2002). Although the efficiency of star formation somewhat depends on the assumed IMF regulating the energy input from supernova explosions, stellar winds, UV flux etc, in reality it is the result of a delicate balance among several concurring physical processes such as the energy input above, cooling of gas by radiative mechanisms, and dynamical conditions establishing when a gas particle of the hydrodynamical models is able to form stars, so that the role of the IMF is of minor relevance (see Chiosi & Carraro (2002) for a detailed discussion of these topics). An efficiency of star formation $`f_\mathrm{s}0.050.1`$ is a sort of general rule. For the Salpeter case (solid and dotted lines in Fig. 9), $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y0.01`$ could be reached if assuming a larger star formation efficiency, $`f_\mathrm{s}0.10.2`$.

However, before drawing any conclusion, it is necessary to perform another important check, related to the concomitant production of heavy metals, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$. In fact, Pop-III metal enrichment should be constrained not to exceed observed upper limits, such as the lowest metallicities measured in Population-II Halo stars, or alternatively the metallicities measured in high-redshift, possibly little evolved, environments like the Lyman-$`\alpha `$ systems.

From spectroscopic analyses of Pop-II stars we can reasonably take $`Z10^5`$ as representative upper limit (see e.g. Norris et al. 1996). As for the high-redshift information the situation is more complex as reviewed by Pettini (1999, 2000). At redshift $`z3`$, the estimated metallicity goes from $`0.30.1Z_{}`$ in Lyman break galaxies (LBG), $`0.10.01Z_{}`$ in Damped Lyman-$`\alpha `$ systems (DLA), down to $`0.010.001Z_{}`$ in Lyman-$`\alpha `$ forests. The metallicity values measured in LBGs and DLAs are relatively high and comparable with the metallicities measured in today’s Pop-I and Pop-II stars, so that these systems are likely to have already experienced significant chemical evolution. More plausibly, low-density Lyman-$`\alpha `$ forests may exhibit, instead, the genuine nucleosynthetic signature of Pop-III stars.

Putting together all these pieces of information, in the present discussion we assume that the maximum allowed metal enrichment should be confined within $`10^5\mathrm{\Delta }Z_{\mathrm{max}}10^3`$.

From inspecting Fig. 10, it turns out that for the Salpeter case (solid and dotted lines) the permitted interval of $`\mathrm{\Delta }Z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ corresponds to a minor helium enrichment $`10^5\mathrm{\Delta }Y\mathrm{few}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^3`$, which is consistent with a quite low star formation efficiency, in the range $`10^4f_\mathrm{s}<10^2`$. This result agrees with previous findings by Ober et al. (1983), and Abia et al. (2001).

On the other hand, in the case of the IMF peaked at $`M1000M_{}`$ (short-dashed line), $`\mathrm{\Delta }Z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ implies a significant helium enrichment, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y>0.01`$, and a much larger efficiency of star formation, $`f_\mathrm{s}>0.1`$. An intermediate situation applies to the case of the extremely top-heavy IMF extending up to super-massive objects (long-dashed line). However, it is worth noticing that under the hypothesis that the first single burst of star formation produced just VMOs with $`M1000M_{}`$ or super-massive objects, the primordial gas would have been enriched only with CNO elements (and possibly some $`\alpha `$-elements), without any contribution in heavier metals, like the iron-group elements.

Finally, we remark that the helium-to-metal enrichment, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$, is independent of the star formation efficiency, but is affected by the individual stellar yields and the IMF features. According to our calculations, the two lower curves of Fig. 10 correspond to a $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z0.150.6`$, respectively. These values are quite low compared to recent observational determinations based on HII regions and predictions of chemical evolution models, e.g. $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z=1.9\pm 0.5`$ can be considered a representative value following Peimbert & Peimbert (2001). On the other hand, the highest curve is described by a huge helium-to-metal-enrichment ratio, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y/\mathrm{\Delta }Z900`$, because of the exceedingly-large helium stellar yield compared to that in the form of CNO elements.

It is clear that this is an extreme situation and large room is allowed for intermediate results in between the case of the Salpeter IMF and that of a IMF peaked at very large masses. Ours is meant as an explorative test indicating that if the primordial IMF was quite different from the classical one, the primordial chemical enrichment may have followed a different path from that one expected under standard prescriptions.

## 4 Concluding remarks

In this work we have discussed the evolutionary properties of zero-metallicity very massive objects ($`120M_{}M1000M_{}`$), on the basis of new calculations that extend the work presented in Paper I. Stellar isochrones (see Appendix A) for ages from 16 Gyr down to $`10^4`$ yr are available at the web-address http://pleiadi.pd astro.it.

In the attempt to estimate the possible effects produced by stellar winds from primordial VMOs, we adopt recent formalisms that describe the role of radiation pressure and stellar rotation as mass-loss driving factors. The emerging picture is the following:

* At extremely low metallicity ($`Z10^6`$), the mechanism of line-radiation transfer should be scarcely efficient, except for very large masses, say $`750M_{}`$. We also find that, as long as the mass loss front penetrates into the chemical profile left by the convective core during the H-burning phase, the maximum CNO abundance exposed at the surface does not exceed $`10^910^8`$, which are typical values required by the CNO-cycle operating in stars with original metal-free composition. Such degree of chemical self-pollution is also too low to trigger efficient radiation-driven winds from zero-metallicity massive stars. Instead, much larger surface enrichment may be attained whenever the nuclear products of He-burning, like carbon and oxygen – potentially able to produce large mass-loss rates – were brought up to the surface by either the penetrating mass-loss front, or some dredge-up process. In our computations this occurs only for the $`1000M_{}`$ model.
* Our calculations also indicate that rotating very massive stars may actually reach the critical condition defined as the $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-limit, which should be likely accompanied by large mass-ejection rates (here taken as large as $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{crit}}=10^3`$ yr-1). However, the net impact on mass loss should be quite limited, given the extremely short time during which these critical regimes can be maintained. To this respect, we remind these results are obtained in the context of a simplified description of stellar rotation, and the reader should consider the remarks expressed in Sect. 2.5.
* Finally we recall that, according to a recent analysis by Baraffe et al. (2001), another possible mass-loss driving mechanism, namely the pulsation instability – usually at work in VMO models with “normal” chemical composition – has been found of modest potential efficiency at zero metallicity, at least for masses $`M500M_{}`$.

By combining the supernova yields available in the literature with our predicted wind contributions, we also evaluate, in a simple way, the chemical enrichment produced by a primeval population of (very) massive stars. It is found that a significant helium enrichment, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y0.01`$, may be reached by assuming that the primordial conditions in the Universe were such that only very massive stars could form, with typical masses of $`1000M_{}`$, or extending into the super-massive domain (up to $`10^5M_{}`$).

In the former case the implied efficiency of gas-to-star conversion should be of the order of $`10\%`$, and the first metal enrichment should be in the form of CNO elements (no iron-group elements). On the other side, under the assumption of the standard Salpeter IMF, the resulting $`\mathrm{\Delta }Y`$ is indeed negligible over the maximum allowed enrichment in metals, $`10^5\mathrm{\Delta }Z_{\mathrm{max}}10^3`$. The corresponding star formation efficiency should be also be quite small, $`0.010.1\%`$.

In any case, as already pointed out long ago by Bond et al. (1983) and Carr (1994), the interesting possibility arises that the first generation of stars could mask the true (somewhat lower) primordial abundance of helium as predicted by the standard Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (e.g. Olive et al. 1997). The question and its implications have been recently addressed by Salvaterra & Ferrara (2002) on the base of the present results.

## Appendix A Isochrones

Basing on the set of evolutionary tracks for VMOs presented in this work, isochrones for very young ages, from $`\mathrm{log}t/\mathrm{yr}=6.6`$ down to $`4.0`$, have been constructed. In this way we complement the set of isochrones for zero-metallicity stars already presented in Paper I. In fact, for ages $`\mathrm{log}t/\mathrm{yr}<6.6`$ the turn-off point corresponds to stars with $`M<100M_{}`$, which defines the maximum initial stellar mass in the former set of tracks.

An example of the extended isochrones in the H-R diagram is illustrated in Fig. 11. For ages $`2\times 10^6t/\mathrm{yr}10^8`$ the termination point marks the stage of central carbon ignition.

Complete tables with the isochrones can be obtained upon request to the authors, or through the WWW site http://pleiadi.pd.astro.it. They cover the complete age range from about $`10^4`$ yr to 16 Gyr ($`4.0\mathrm{log}(t/\mathrm{yr})10.25`$). Isochrones are provided at $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{log}t=0.05`$ intervals. We refer to Paper I (appendix B) and the quoted web-site for all the details concerning the description of the table format and layout, as well as the sources for magnitude and colour transformations.

###### Acknowledgements.

We are grateful to Léo Girardi for his help in the construction of stellar isochrones; N. Langer, J. Puls, and N.J. Shaviv for useful advice in the matter of stellar winds and stellar rotation. We also thank the referee, D. Schaerer, for many important remarks that much improved the final version of the paper. P.M. and C.C. acknowledge financial support from the Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR).


format: text

text:
# General solutions for flat Friedmann universe filled by perfect fluid and scalar field with exponential potential

## 1 Introduction

A large class of theories (multidimensional , Kaluza-Klein models, supergravity and superstring theories, higher order gravity, see for instance ,) deal with a weakly coupled scalar field $`\phi `$ with a potential of the form

$$V(\phi )=\frac{V_0}{\kappa ^2}\mathrm{}^{\sqrt{6}\sigma \kappa \phi },$$
(1)
where $`\kappa =\sqrt{8\pi G_N}`$, $`\sigma `$ is a dimensionless positive constant, characterizing the steepness of the potential, and the constant $`V_0`$ may be positive and negative. A number of authors - (see also references therein) have studied a spationally homogeneous and isotropic Friedmann model containing both a scalar field and a perfect fluid subject to the linear equation of state

$$p=(1h)\rho ,$$
(2)
where the constant $`h`$ satisfied $`0h2`$. The attention was mainly focussed on the qualitative behaviour of solutions, stability of the exceptional solutions to curvature and shear perturbations and their possible applications within the known cosmological scenaria such as inflation and scaling (”tracking”) . In particular, it was found by a phase plane analysis  that for ”flat” positive potentials ($`V_0>0,0<\sigma ^2<1h/2`$) there exists an unique late-time attractor in the form of the scalar dominated solution. It is stable within homogeneous and isotropic models with non-zero spatial curvature with respect to spatial curvature perturbations for $`\sigma ^2<1/3`$ and provides the power-law inflation. For ”intermediate” positive potentials ($`V_0>0,1h/2<\sigma ^2<1`$) an unique late-time attractor is the scaling solution, where the scalar field ”mimics” the perfect fluid, adopting its equation of state. The energy-density of the scalar field scales with that of the perfect fluid. For $`h>4/3`$ this solution is stable within generic Bianchi models to curvature and shear perturbations and provides the power-low inflation. The scaling solution is unstable to curvature perturbations, when $`0<h<4/3`$, although it is stable to shear perturbations. Regions on $`(\sigma ^2,h)`$ parametrical plane corresponding to various qualitative evolution are presented on figure 1.

Integrability of the model is not well studied yet. Only for the special case for $`h=1`$ (dust) and $`\sigma =1/2`$ the procedure of getting a solution to the model was given in .

In the present paper we study the problem of integrability by quadrature of a spatially flat Friedmann model containing both a minimally coupled scalar field with the exponential potential (1) and a perfect fluid with the equation of state (2) for several classes of sets of $`(\sigma ,h)`$-parameters. We apply the methods developed in our previous papers - devoted to integrability of multidimensional cosmological models. It is clear that the possibility of reducing the problem to quadrature depends on the parameters $`\sigma `$ and $`h`$. We show that in a general case the problem is reduced to integrability of a second order ordinary differential equation known as the generalized Emden-Fowler equation, which was investigated by discrete-group methods ,. We present here 4 classes of general solutions for the parameters obeying the following relations.

A. $`\sigma `$ is arbitrary, $`h=0`$.

B. $`\sigma =1h/2`$, $`0<h<2`$.

C1. $`\sigma =1h/4`$, $`0<h2`$.

C2. $`\sigma =|1h|`$, $`0<h2`$, $`h1,4/3`$.
The corresponding curves on $`(h,\sigma ^2)`$ parametrical plane are presented on figure 1.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we describe the model and obtain the Einstein-scalar field equations in the form of the Lagrange-Euler equations following from some Lagrangian. Dynamical system described by the Lagrangian of this form belongs to the class of pseudo-Euclidean Toda-like systems. To integrate them we apply in section 3 the methods developed in our papers  on multidimensional cosmology. The method used in the general case C ($`\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2,0<h2`$) is based on reducing the Euler-Lagrange equations to the generalized Emden-Fowler (second-order ordinary differential) equation. To conclude the paper, we discuss in section 4 the physical properties of the obtained exact solutions. Asymptotic behaviour of these solutions at early and late times is analyzed. Example of the explicit solution in the cosmic time is presented.

## 2 The model

We start with Einstein Eqs. in a spatially flat Friedmann metric

$$s^2=\mathrm{}^{2\alpha (t)}t^2+\mathrm{}^{2x(t)}\left[r^2+r^2\left(\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{d}\varphi ^2\right)\right],$$
(3)
where $`\mathrm{exp}[x(t)]a(t)`$ is the scale factor and the function $`\alpha (t)`$ determines a time gauge ($`\alpha (t)0`$ corresponds to the cosmic time $`t_c`$ gauge). We assume that the universe contains both a self-interacting scalar field $`\phi `$ with a potential $`V(\phi )`$ and a separately conserved perfect fluid with the barotropic equation of state (2). The governing set of equations, which follows from coupled Einstein and scalar field equations, reads

$`\dot{x}^2={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{3}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\phi }^2+\left(V(\phi )+\rho \right)\mathrm{}^{2\alpha }\right],`$ (4)
$`\ddot{x}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\dot{\alpha }3\dot{x})\dot{x}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\phi }^2\left(V(\phi )p\right)\mathrm{}^{2\alpha }\right],`$ (5)
$`\ddot{\phi }=(\dot{\alpha }3\dot{x})\dot{\phi }V^{}(\phi )\mathrm{}^{2\alpha },`$ (6)
$`\dot{\rho }=3\dot{x}(p+\rho ).`$ (7)
Using the barotropic equation of state we get immediately ¿from Eq.(7)

$$\rho =\frac{\rho _0}{\kappa ^2}\mathrm{}^{3(2h)x},$$
(8)
where $`\rho _0`$ is an arbitrary positive constant.

It can be easily verified, that the set of Eqs.(4)-(6), where the presence of a perfect fluid density $`\rho `$ and its pressure $`p`$ is cancelled by Eqs.(2)and (8), is equivalent to the set of Euler-Lagrange equations obtained from the Lagrangian

$$L(x,y,\alpha ,\dot{x},\dot{y})=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}^{3x\alpha }\left(\dot{x}^2+\dot{y}^2\right)\frac{\kappa ^2}{6}\mathrm{}^{\alpha 3x}\left[\rho _0\mathrm{}^{3hx}+\mathrm{}^{6x}V\left(\frac{\sqrt{6}}{\kappa }y\right)\right],$$
(9)
where we introduced the following dimensionless variable

$`y={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{\sqrt{6}}}\phi .`$
The equation $`L/\alpha =(L/\dot{\alpha })/t=0`$ leads to the constraint Eq.(4). Fixing the gauge $`\alpha F(x,y)`$, we can consider Eqs.(5),(6) as the Euler-Lagrange equations obtained from the Lagrangian (9) under the zero-energy constraint (4).

In what follows we consider the potential of the form (1). As the system is symmetric under the transformation $`\sigma \sigma ,\phi \phi `$, without a loss of generality we will consider only the case $`\sigma >0`$. For the exponential potential (1) the Lagrangian (9) looks as follows

$$L(x,y,\alpha ,\dot{x},\dot{y})=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}^{3x\alpha }\left(\dot{x}^2+\dot{y}^2\right)\frac{\kappa ^2}{6}\mathrm{}^{\alpha 3x}\left[\rho _0\mathrm{}^{3hx}+V_0\mathrm{}^{6(x\sigma y)}\right].$$
(10)
Dynamical system described by the Lagrangian of this form belongs to the class of pseudo-Euclidean Toda-like systems investigated in our previous papers . Methods for integrating of pseudo-Euclidean Toda-like systems are based on the Minkowski-like geometry for characteristic vectors $`(\alpha _0+3(h1),0)\text{IR}^2`$ and $`(\alpha _0+3,6\sigma )\text{IR}^2`$ appearing when one puts the gauge $`\alpha =\alpha _0x`$ with $`\alpha _0=`$const. Here we do not describe the methods and refer to the above mentioned papers.

## 3 General solutions

A. $`\sigma `$ is arbitrary, $`h=0`$.
Here we suppose that the perfect fluid pressure $`p`$ is equal to its density $`\rho `$ (Zeldovich-type, or stiff matter). In this case the system with Lagrangian (10) is integrable for arbitrary parameter $`\sigma `$ in the so-called harmonic time gauge defined by

$$\alpha (x)=3x.$$
(11)
Let us consider two different cases: $`\sigma 1`$ and $`\sigma =1`$.

If $`\sigma 1`$ we introduce the following variables

$`u=\sigma x+y,v=x\sigma y.`$
In the terms of $`u`$ and $`v`$ the equations of motion and the zero-energy constraint look as follows

$`\ddot{u}=0,`$
$`\ddot{v}=V_0(1\sigma ^2)\mathrm{}^{6v},`$
$`\dot{u}^2+\dot{v}^2={\displaystyle \frac{1\sigma ^2}{3}}\left[\rho _0+V_0\mathrm{}^{6v}\right].`$
We notice that for $`v`$ we get the Liouville equation. Integrating this set of equations and inverting the linear transformation, we get the following general solution:

the scale factor

$$a\mathrm{}^x=a_0\left[f(tt_0)\mathrm{}^{\sigma A(tt_0)}\right]^{1/[3(\sigma ^21)]},$$
(12)
the scalar field

$$\phi =\frac{\sqrt{6}}{\kappa }\{\mathrm{ln}\left[f^\sigma (tt_0)\mathrm{}^{A(tt_0)}\right]^{1/[3(\sigma ^21)]}+y_0\},$$
(13)
where we introduced the function

$`f(tt_0)`$ $`=\mathrm{sinh}(\sqrt{B}|tt_0|)/\sqrt{B},V_0(1\sigma ^2)>0,B>0,`$
$`=\mathrm{cosh}(\sqrt{B}|tt_0|)/\sqrt{B},V_0(1\sigma ^2)<0,B>0,`$
$`=\mathrm{sin}(\sqrt{B}|tt_0|)/\sqrt{B},V_0(1\sigma ^2)>0,B<0,`$
$`=|tt_0|,V_0(1\sigma ^2)>0,B=0.`$
The constant $`B`$ is defined by

$`B=A^2+3(1\sigma ^2)\rho _0.`$
The general solution contains 2 arbitrary constants $`t_0`$, $`A`$ and 2 constants $`a_0`$,$`y_0`$, obeying the constraint:

$`\mathrm{}^{6\sigma y_0}=3a_0^6|V_0(1\sigma ^2)|.`$
For the second case $`\sigma =1`$ the equations of motion and the zero-energy constraint with respect to the harmonic time gauge read in the old variables

$`\ddot{x}=V_0\mathrm{}^{6(xy)},`$
$`\ddot{y}=V_0\mathrm{}^{6(xy)},`$
$`\dot{x}^2+\dot{y}^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left[\rho _0+V_0\mathrm{}^{6(xy)}\right].`$
We immediately find the integral of motion $`\dot{x}\dot{y}=\mathrm{const}2A`$.

If $`V_0>0`$ the constant $`A`$ is nonzero due to the zero-energy constraint. The general solution in this case for arbitrary $`V_0`$ looks as follows

$`a\mathrm{}^x=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\left(A+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{12A}}\right)(tt_0)+V_0\left[\mathrm{}^{12A(tt_0)}1\right]+x_0\right\},`$ (14)
$`\phi ={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{6}}{\kappa }}\left\{\left(A+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{12A}}\right)(tt_0)+V_0\left[\mathrm{}^{12A(tt_0)}1\right]+y_0\right\},`$ (15)
where the constants $`A,t_0`$ are arbitrary and the constants $`x_0,y_0`$ obey the relation $`y_0x_0=2At_0`$.

For $`V_0<0`$ the additional solution appears (corresponding to $`A=0`$, $`\dot{x}=\dot{y}`$)

$`a\mathrm{}^x=\mathrm{exp}\left\{B(tt_0){\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{2}}(tt_0)^2+x_0\right\},`$
$`\phi ={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{\sqrt{6}}}\left[\mathrm{ln}a+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\mathrm{ln}(\rho _0/V_0)\right],`$
where $`B`$ and $`x_0`$ are arbitrary constants. We remind that $`t`$ is the harmonic time. It is connected with the cosmic time $`t_c`$ by the differential equation $`t_c=a^3t`$.

B. $`\sigma =1h/2`$, $`0<h<2`$.
We notice that the model for $`\sigma =1/2`$ and $`h=1`$ has been integrated in . Here we study a more general case. We fix the time gauge choosing the following function $`\alpha (x)`$:

$`\alpha (x)=3(1h)x.`$
Then, with respect to the new variables $`u`$ and $`v`$ defined by

$`u=\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{3h}{2}}(xy)\right],v=\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{3h}{2}}(x+y)\right]`$
the equations of motion and the zero-energy constraint may be written in a rather simple form

$`\ddot{u}=0,`$
$`\ddot{v}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}h(2h)V_0u^{(43h)/h},`$
$`\dot{u}\dot{v}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}h^2\left[\rho _0+V_0u^{2(2h)/h}\right].`$
The set of equations is easily integrable. We obtain

$`u=A(tt_0)>0,`$
$`v={\displaystyle \frac{3h^2}{4A^2}}\left\{\rho _0A(tt_0)+{\displaystyle \frac{h}{4h}}V_0[A(tt_0)]^{(4h)/h}+B\right\}>0,`$
where $`A`$ is an arbitrary nonzero constant and $`B`$ is an arbitrary nonnegative constant, $`V_0`$ has arbitrary sign. If $`V_0<0`$, then, the following additional special solution arises

$`u=(\rho _0/V_0)^{h/[2(2h)]},`$
$`v={\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}h(2h)\rho _0^{h/(2h)]}\left[T^2(tt_0)^2\right],`$
where the integration constant $`T0`$. Then, one easily gets the scale factor

$`a\mathrm{}^x=(uv)^{1/(3h)}`$ (16)
and the scalar field

$`\phi ={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2/3}}{\kappa h}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{v}{u}}.`$ (17)
C. $`\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2,0<h2`$.
We introduce the following variables for the factorization of the potential in the Lagrangian ()

$`u=3[\sigma x(1h/2)y],`$
$`v=3[(h/21)x+\sigma y]\mathrm{ln}\sqrt{|V_0|/\rho _0}.`$
Then, the equations of motion and the zero-energy constraint for $`u`$ and $`v`$ in the harmonic time gauge defined by Eq.(11) look as follows

$`\ddot{u}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}h\sigma A_0\left(\mathrm{}^{2v}+\epsilon \right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{h\sigma u+(2h2\sigma ^2)v}{\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2}}\right\},`$ (18)
$`\ddot{v}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}A_0\left(h(1{\displaystyle \frac{h}{2}})\mathrm{}^{2v}+(2h2\sigma ^2)\epsilon \right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{h\sigma u+(2h2\sigma ^2)v}{\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2}}\right\},`$ (19)
$`\dot{u}^2+\dot{v}^2+3A_0[\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2]\left(\mathrm{}^{2v}+\epsilon \right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{h\sigma u+(2h2\sigma ^2)v}{\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2}}\right\}=0,`$ (20)
where we denoted

$`A_0=\rho _0^{\frac{2h2\sigma ^2}{2[\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2]}}|V_0|^{\frac{h(1h/2)}{2[\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2]}},`$
$`\epsilon =\mathrm{sgn}(V_0).`$
Let us express $`\dot{v}^2`$ from the zero-energy condition (20) as follows

$`\dot{v}^2=\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{u}{v}}\right)^21\right]^13A_0[\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2]\left(\mathrm{}^{2v}+\epsilon \right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{h\sigma u+(2h2\sigma ^2)v}{\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2}}\right\}.`$ (21)
Substituting $`\ddot{u}`$, $`\ddot{v}`$ and $`\dot{v}^2`$ into the relation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2u}{^2v}}={\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{u}\ddot{v}u/v}{\dot{v}^2}},`$ (22)
we obtain the following second order ordinary differential equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2u}{v^2}}=\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{u}{v}}\right)^21\right]\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sigma ^2(1h^2/4)}{\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^{2v}\epsilon }{\mathrm{}^{2v}+\epsilon }}\right){\displaystyle \frac{u}{v}}+{\displaystyle \frac{h\sigma /2}{\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2}}\right\}.`$ (23)
The procedure is valid if $`\dot{v}0`$.

The exceptional solution with $`\dot{v}0`$ appears only for the positive potential when $`\sigma ^2>1h/2`$ and $`0<h<2`$. In the terms of the cosmic time $`t_c`$ it reads

$`a=\left\{\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3\rho _0}{4(\sigma ^2(1h/2)}}}\sigma (2h)|t_ct_c^0|\right\}^{2/[3(2h)]},`$ (24)
$`\phi ={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2/3}}{\kappa \sigma }}\mathrm{ln}\left(\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{h}}(2h)V_0}\sigma |t_ct_c^0|\right).`$ (25)
It should be mentioned, that the set of the equations (18)-(20) does not admit static solutions $`\dot{u}=\dot{v}0`$ as well as the solutions with $`\dot{u}=\pm \dot{v}`$. So, using the relations (21) and (22) we do not lose any solutions except, possibly, the exceptional solution (24),(25).

Let us suppose that one is able to obtain the general solution to the equation (23) in the parametrical form $`v=v(\tau )`$, $`u=u(\tau )`$, where $`\tau `$ is a parameter. Then, we obtain the scale factor $`a\mathrm{exp}[x]`$ and the scalar field $`\phi =(\sqrt{6}/\kappa )y`$ as functions of the parameter $`\tau `$. The relation between the parameter $`\tau `$ and the harmonic time $`t`$ may be always derived by integration of the zero-energy constraint written in the form of the following separable equation

$`t^2={\displaystyle \frac{\left(\frac{u}{\tau }\right)^2\left(\frac{v}{\tau }\right)^2}{3A_0[\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2]\left(\mathrm{}^{2v}+\epsilon \right)}}\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{h\sigma u+(2h2\sigma ^2)v}{\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2}}\right\}\tau ^2.`$ (26)
Thus, the problem of the integrability by quadrature of the model is reduced to the integrability of the equation (23). For $`u/v`$ it represents the first-order nonlinear ordinary differential equation. Its right hand side is the third-order polynomial (with coefficients depending on $`v`$) with respect to the $`u/v`$. An equation of such type is called Abel’s equation (see, for instance, ,).

First of all let us notice that the equation (23) has the partial solution $`u=\pm v+`$const that make the relation (21) singular. However, as was already mentioned, the set of Eqs.(18)-(20) does not admit the solutions with $`\dot{u}=\pm \dot{v}`$. Existence of this partial solution to the Abel equation (23) allows one to find the following nontrivial transformation

$`\mathrm{}^{2v}`$ $`=`$ $`\epsilon {\displaystyle \frac{X}{Y}}{\displaystyle \frac{Y}{X}},`$ (27)
$`u`$ $`=`$ $`\delta \left[v+\mathrm{ln}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{Y}{X}}\right|+\mathrm{ln}C\right],\delta =\pm 1,C>0,`$ (28)
that reduces it to the so-called generalized Emden-Fowler equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2Y}{X^2}}=\mathrm{sgn}[\sigma ^2(1h/2)^2]\left(\epsilon {\displaystyle \frac{Y}{X}}\right)^lY^mX^n,`$ (29)
where the constant parameters $`l,m`$ and $`n`$ read

$`l={\displaystyle \frac{2(\delta \sigma 1+h/4)}{\delta \sigma 1+h/2}},m={\displaystyle \frac{\delta \sigma +1h}{\delta \sigma +1h/2}},n=m3.`$ (30)
In the special case $`l=0`$ Eq.(29) is known as the Emden-Fowler equation.

There are no methods for integrating of the generalized Emden-Fowler equation with arbitrary independent parameters $`l,m`$ and $`n`$. However, the discrete-group methods developed in  allow to integrate by quadrature 3 two-parametrical classes, 11 one-parametrical classes and about 90 separated points in the parametrical space $`(l,m,n)`$ of the generalized Emden-Fowler equation. Further we consider the following integrable classes.

C1. $`\sigma =1h/4`$, $`0<h2,\delta =1`$.
The parameters $`l`$ and $`m`$ given by Eq. (30) are the following

$`l=0,m=1+{\displaystyle \frac{2h}{83h}}(1,1].`$ (31)
The general solution to the generalized Emden-Fowler equation (29) with these parameters reads

$`Y={\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{F_m(\tau )}}>0,X={\displaystyle \frac{1}{F_m(\tau )}}>0,`$
where we introduced the following function

$`F_m(\tau )=\pm {\displaystyle \left[\frac{2}{m+1}\tau ^{m+1}+C_1\right]^{1/2}\tau }+C_2.`$ (32)
The variable $`\tau `$ changes on the interval which follows from $`G_m(\tau )>0`$, where we used the function

$`G_m(\tau )=\epsilon \left[{\displaystyle \frac{F_m(\tau )}{\tau F_m^{}(\tau )}}1\right]`$ (33)
equal to the right hand side of Eqs.(27) with substitutions of $`X,Y`$ and (32). Finally, using Eqs.(27),(28) we find the scale factor

$`a=a_0\tau ^{\frac{4(4h)}{3h(83h)}}G_m^{\frac{2}{3h}}(\tau )`$ (34)
and the scalar field

$`\phi ={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{6}}{\kappa }}\left\{\mathrm{ln}\left[\tau ^{\frac{8(2h)}{3h(83h)}}G_m^{\frac{2}{3h}}(\tau )\right]+y_0\right\},`$ (35)
where

$`a_0=C^{\frac{4(4h)}{3h(83h)}}(|V_0|/\rho _0)^{\frac{4(2h)}{3h(83h)}},y_0=\mathrm{ln}\left[C^{\frac{8(2h)}{3h(83h)}}(|V_0|/\rho _0)^{\frac{2(4h)}{3h(83h)}}\right].`$
The relation between the variable $`\tau `$ and the cosmic time $`t_c`$ is the following

$`t_c^2=I_0\tau ^{\frac{4(2h)(43h)}{h(83h)}}G_m^{\frac{2(2h)}{h}}(\tau )\left[F_m^{}(\tau )\right]^2\tau ^2,`$ (36)
where

$`I_0=16\rho _0^{\frac{(4h)^2}{h(83h)}}|V_0|^{\frac{4(2h)^2}{h(83h)}}C^{\frac{4(2h)(4h)}{h(83h)}}/[3h(83h].`$
The general solution (34),(35) (with $`l`$ and $`m`$ given by(31)) contains 3 arbitrary constants $`C`$, $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ as required.

C2. $`\sigma =|1h|`$, $`0<h2`$, $`h1,4/3,\delta =\mathrm{sgn}(1h)`$.
Now we have the following parameters in the generalized Emden-Fowler equation

$`l=3,m=1+{\displaystyle \frac{h}{43h}}.`$ (37)
Its general solution looks as follows

$`X={\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{R_m(\tau )}}>0,Y={\displaystyle \frac{1}{R_m(\tau )}}>0,`$
where the function $`R_m(\tau )`$ is defined by

$`R_m(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`\pm {\displaystyle \left[\frac{2\epsilon }{|m+2|}\tau ^{m2}+C_1\right]^{1/2}\tau }+C_2,m2,`$ (38)
$`=`$ $`\pm {\displaystyle \left[\epsilon \mathrm{ln}\tau ^2+C_1\right]^{1/2}\tau }+C_2,m=2.`$ (39)
The variable $`\tau `$ changes on an interval, where

$`S_m(\tau )=\epsilon \left[{\displaystyle \frac{R_m(\tau )}{\tau R_m^{}(\tau )}}1\right]>0.`$ (40)
Finally, we get

$`a=a_0\tau ^{\frac{4(1h)}{3h(43h)}}S_m^{\frac{1}{3h}}(\tau )`$ (41)
$`\phi ={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{6}}{\kappa }}\mathrm{sgn}(1h)\left\{\mathrm{ln}\left[\tau ^{\frac{2(2h)}{3h(43h)}}S_m^{\frac{1}{3h}}(\tau )\right]+y_0\right\},`$ (42)
where

$`a_0=C^{\frac{4(1h)}{3h(3h4)}}(|V_0|/\rho _0)^{\frac{2(2h)}{3h(3h4)}},y_0=\mathrm{ln}\left[C^{\frac{2(2h)}{3h(3h4)}}(|V_0|/\rho _0)^{\frac{4(1h)}{3h(3h4)}}\right].`$
The variable $`\tau `$ and the cosmic time $`t_c`$ are related by

$`t_c^2=U_0\tau ^{\frac{4(23h)}{3h}}S_m^{\frac{2(1h)}{h}}(\tau )\left[R_m^{}(\tau )\right]^2\tau ^2,`$ (43)
where

$`U_0=4\rho _0^{\frac{4(1h)^2}{h(3h4)}}|V_0|^{\frac{(2h)^2}{h(3h4)}}C^{\frac{4(2h)(1h)}{h(3h4)}}/(3h|3h4|).`$
So, this general solution is given in the parametrical form by (41),(42) with $`l`$ and $`m`$ from (37). The transition to the cosmic time may be done by solving (43).

## 4 Properties of solutions

Here we study properties of the obtained exact solutions for positive potentials, though our solutions are valid for any sign of the potential. As the system is symmetrical under the time reflection $`tt`$, without loss of generality we only consider expanding near the singularity cosmologies with the Hubble parameter $`H=\dot{x}\mathrm{exp}(\alpha )>0`$.

We introduce the following notation for the relative energy densities

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2\rho }{3H^2}},\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2(\phi /t_c)^2}{6H^2}},\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi P}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2V(\phi )}{3H^2}}.`$
Due to the constraint (4) the relative energy densities obey the relation

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho +\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}+\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi P}=1.`$
Also we introduce the scalar field barotropic parameter

$`{\displaystyle \frac{p_\phi }{\rho _\phi }}={\displaystyle \frac{\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\phi }{t_c}\right)^2+V(\phi )}{\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\phi }{t_c}\right)^2V(\phi )}}.`$
A1. $`0<\sigma <1`$, $`h=0`$.
The general solution is given by Eqs.(12),(13) for $`V_0(1\sigma ^2)>0,B0`$. Near the initial singularity ($`t_c+0`$) the scale factor is in the main order $`at_c^{1/3}`$. There exists the special solution for $`A=\sigma \sqrt{B}`$ with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho 1`$ as $`t_c+0`$. It corresponds to the fluid-dominated solution mentioned in . It gives $`p_\phi /\rho _\phi 1`$ (stiff matter) as $`t_c+0`$.

For all remaining solutions we obtain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho 1\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}^0,\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}^0,\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi P}0`$ as $`t_c+0`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}^0=(\sigma \sqrt{B}A)^2/(\sqrt{B}\sigma A)^2`$. Then the barotropic parameter $`p_\phi /\rho _\phi `$ tends to $`1`$, i.e the scalar field is vacuum-like (de Sitter) near the initial singularity.

There is an unique late-time attractor in the form of the scalar field dominated solution. It corresponds to $`B=0`$, and $`\rho _0=0`$ in formulas (12),(13) presenting the general solution. The attractor may be written down for the cosmic time $`t_c`$

$`a=\stackrel{~}{a}_0t_c^{1/(3\sigma ^2)},`$
$`\phi ={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2/3}}{\kappa \sigma }}\left[\mathrm{ln}t_c+\mathrm{ln}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3V_0\sigma ^4}{1\sigma ^2}}}\right].`$
It is easy to see that for this solution

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho =0,\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}=\sigma ^2,\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi P}=1\sigma ^2,{\displaystyle \frac{p_\phi }{\rho _\phi }}=2\sigma ^21.`$
This attracting solution according to  may be called kinetic-potential scaling. For $`\sigma ^2<1/3`$ all solutions provide the power law inflation at late times.

A2. $`1<\sigma `$, $`h=0`$.
The general solution is given by (12),(13) for $`V_0(1\sigma ^2)<0,B>0`$. Behavior near the initial singularity is the same for both general and special solutions with the only difference that the constant $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}^0`$ is the following $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}^0=(\sigma \sqrt{B}+A)^2/(\sqrt{B}+\sigma A)^2`$.

At the final stage of evolution as $`t_c+\mathrm{}`$ we obtain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho 1\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}^f,\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}^f,\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi P}0,p_\phi /\rho _\phi 1,at_c^{1/3}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}^f=(\sigma \sqrt{B}A)^2/(\sqrt{B}\sigma A)^2`$. Such behaviour of the scalar field, when it adopts the usual perfect fluid equation of state and its energy-density scales with that of the perfect fluid, is called scaling (or sometimes ”tracking”).

B and C2 in regions Ia and Ib.
Behaviour near the initial singularity was described in  using qualitative methods. There exists the fluid dominated solution with $`at_c^{2/[3(2h)]}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho 1`$ as $`t_c+0`$. All remaining solutions describe the domination of the kinetic contribution of the scalar field: $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho 0,\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}1,\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi P}0,p_\phi /\rho _\phi 1,at_c^{1/3}.`$

The behaviour at late times is the same as one for A1.

C1 and C2 in regions IIa and IIb.
Behaviour near the initial singularity is the same as in the previous case. The late-time attractor for $`h(0,h)`$ is the special solution described by Eqs.(24) and (25). For these solution we have

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho =1{\displaystyle \frac{2h}{2\sigma ^2}},\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}={\displaystyle \frac{(2h)^2}{4\sigma ^2}},\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi P}={\displaystyle \frac{h(2h)}{4\sigma ^2}},{\displaystyle \frac{p_\phi }{\rho _\phi }}=1h.`$
This is a typical scaling behaviour.

One of the examples of this behaviour may be given explicitly: the exact solution of the class C1 with $`h=2`$ and $`\sigma =1/2`$ for the positive potential reads with respect to the cosmic time

$`a=a_0\mathrm{}^{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }/3}t_c}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1A\mathrm{}^{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(t_ct_c^0)}}{1+A\mathrm{}^{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(t_ct_c^0)}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{2}}(t_ct_c^0){\displaystyle \frac{2A\left(1A\mathrm{}^{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(t_ct_c^0)}\right)}{(1+A)\left(1+A\mathrm{}^{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(t_ct_c^0)}\right)}}\right]\right\}^{1/3},`$
$`\phi ={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{6}}{\kappa }}\mathrm{ln}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{V_0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1+A\mathrm{}^{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(t_ct_c^0)}}{1A\mathrm{}^{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}(t_ct_c^0)}}}({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{3\mathrm{\Lambda }}}{2}}(t_ct_c^0){\displaystyle \frac{1A}{1+A}})1]\right\}^{1/3},`$
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\rho _0`$ is the cosmological constant. The solution contains 3 integration constants: arbitrary $`t_c^0`$, positive $`a_0`$ and A obeying $`|A|<1`$. The late-time attractor corresponds to $`A=0`$. For this attracting solution we get: $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho 1,\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi K}0,\mathrm{\Omega }_{\phi P}0,p_\phi /\rho _\phi 1,at_c^{1/3}\mathrm{exp}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }/3}t_c,H\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }/3}`$ as $`t_c+\mathrm{}`$.

This work was supported in part by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (Grant 01-02-17312) and DFG Project 436 RUS 113/678/0-1. V.R.G and V.N.M. are grateful to colleagues of the university of Konstanz for their hospitality.

## References