text:
# Three-component Stäckel potentials satisfying recent estimates of Milky Way parameters

## 1 Introduction

The determination of the mass distribution and dynamical structure of the Milky Way is one of the fundamental tasks of Galactic Astronomy. Even though the Milky Way is a spiral barred galaxy, axisymmetric models are a necessary starting point for perturbation analysis and are thus a prerequisite if one wants to understand the bar on a theoretical basis. Caldwell & Ostriker (1981), Rohlfs & Kreitschmann (1988) and, recently, Dehnen & Binney (1998) fitted axisymmetric mass models of the Milky Way to various measurements of the gravitational force field: they concluded that a wide variety of models can emerge from this fitting process and that the mass distribution of the Galaxy is still ill-determined.

In order to fully exploit kinematical stellar surveys, we should construct dynamical models based on Jeans (1915) theorem. This theorem states that the phase space distribution function of a stellar system in a steady state depends only on three isolating integrals of the motion: numerical experiments (Ollongren 1962; Innanen & Papp 1977; Richstone 1982) showed that most orbits in realistic galactic potentials admit three such integrals. The third integral, in addition to the binding energy and the vertical component of the angular momentum, is not analytic in a general potential: it is possible to define an approximate third integral specific to particular orbital families (de Zeeuw, Evans & Schwarzschild 1996; Evans, Häfner & de Zeeuw 1997; De Bruyne, Leeuwin & Dejonghe 2000) or to foliate phase space with tori on which three action integrals can be defined in a potential that differs from the non-integrable one by only a small amount (Kaasalainen & Binney 1994; Binney 2002). Instead, we choose to construct models with an exact analytic third integral by using Stäckel potentials (Stäckel 1890). These potentials were introduced into stellar dynamics by Eddington (1915) and have since been used in a number of papers (e.g. Lynden-Bell 1962; de Zeeuw 1985; Dejonghe 1993; Sevenster, Dejonghe & Habing 1995; Durand, Dejonghe & Acker 1996; Bienaymé 1999) : in fact, the regularity of typical galactic potentials can be understood in terms of their proximity to Stäckel potentials (e.g. Gerhard 1985).

Our long term goal is to constrain the mass distribution of the Galaxy by using kinematical stellar surveys: we shall choose a Stäckel potential, and use the quadratic programming technique described by Dejonghe (1989) to determine, for the available surveys, distribution functions in the space of the integrals of the motion (see Famaey, Van Caelenberg & Dejonghe 2002). Then we shall compare the resulting predictions with the surveys. The potential will be modified in the light of that comparison. Thus the first step is to show that different Stäckel potentials are compatible with the standard constraints for a mass model of the Milky Way.

In this paper, our goal is to show that a wide variety of simple Stäckel potentials can fit most known parameters of the Milky Way (including Hipparcos latest findings). In order to do this, we continue the work of Batsleer & Dejonghe (1994, hereafter BD) who presented a set of simple Stäckel potentials with two mass components (halo and disc) and a flat rotation curve, that we generalize by adding a thick disc to them since its existence as a separate stellar component is now well documented (Ojha et al. 1994; Chen et al. 2001). These new potentials are described by five parameters and we will show that many different combinations of these parameters are consistent with fundamental constraints for a mass model of the Milky Way.

In the next section, we review the observational constraints that any mass model of the Milky Way must satisfy. In section 3, we present the mathematical form of the set of Stäckel potentials studied in this paper, and we choose selection criteria in the light of the constraints reviewed in section 2. In section 4, we examine the consequences of those selection criteria and we present five potentials differing in terms of form and features, and that are plausible for the Milky Way. For the conclusions, we refer to section 5.

## 2 Observational constraints

Recently, Hipparcos data (ESA 1997) have brought nearly definitive answers to some long-standing questions in Galactic Astronomy. In this section, we review the determination of those galactic fundamental parameters that any Milky Way potential must match.

### 2.1 Galactocentric radius of the sun

The distance of the sun to the galactic center is difficult to estimate: the direct method is to compare the average radial velocities with the average proper motions of maser spots in star forming regions near the galactic center, but this method needs very accurate observations and it is affected by extinction. If the density of the objects of the stellar halo of the Milky Way peaks at the galactic center, the galactocentric radius of the sun can then also be measured by determining the distance of this density peak: the problem of this method is that any uncertainty in the absolute magnitude of the stellar candles will reverberate in the estimation of the galactocentric distance of the sun. The measurements of this distance have been reviewed by Reid (1993), and they tend to approach 8 kpc. In this paper, we assume this estimate of 8 kpc for the galactocentic solar radius, with an uncertainty of the order of 0.5 kpc.

### 2.2 Flat rotation curve

The stars of the disc travel in nearly circular orbits around the galactic center. The determination of the rotation curve $`v_c(\varpi )`$, where $`\varpi `$ is the galactocentric radius, and in particular $`v_c(\varpi _{})`$ is one of the hardest problems in Galactic Structure (see section 2.3 for the local shape of the rotation curve and the determination of $`v_c(\varpi _{})`$). The rotation curve is determined by observations of the kinematics of the gas, and in particular of the neutral hydrogen 21 cm line, but the rotation curve is not well established for the galactic radii $`\varpi >\varpi _{}`$. Observations of outer spiral galaxies indicate that the rotation curve remains more or less flat after attaining its maximum (e.g. Casertano & van Gorkom 1991): the rotation curve of a mass model of the Milky Way therefore is likely to behave similarly.

### 2.3 Oort constants and local circular speed

As the global shape of the rotation curve is not known precisely, the determination of its local shape in the solar neighbourhood is fundamental for a better knowledge of local Galactic Structure. Lindblad (1925) and Oort (1927a,b) developed the model of differential axisymmetric rotation with $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\frac{v_c}{\varpi }`$ depending only on the distance $`\varpi `$ to the galactic center. Oort (1927a) introduced two constants (the Oort constants $`A`$ and $`B`$), that can be determined from proper motions of neighbouring stars and that are directly related to the local shape of the rotation curve. Indeed, for a star of the solar neighbourhood on a circular orbit, Taylor expanding $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\varpi )`$ to first order in $`(\varpi \varpi _{})`$ yields for the radial and transverse velocities (with $`d`$ denoting the distance to the sun):

$$v_r=Ad\mathrm{sin2}l$$
(1)
$$v_t=Ad\mathrm{cos2}l+Bd$$
(2)
with

$$A=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{v_c}{\varpi }\frac{\mathrm{d}v_c}{\mathrm{d}\varpi })_\varpi _{},B=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{v_c}{\varpi }+\frac{\mathrm{d}v_c}{\mathrm{d}\varpi })_\varpi _{}$$
(3)
Kuijken & Tremaine (1991) showed that the Taylor expansion terms arising from non-circularity of the orbits are negligible, just as they should be if the Milky Way is axisymmetric. Oort (1927b) showed for the first time this sinusoidal effect of the galactic rotation on the radial velocities and on the proper motions. He found $`A=19\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$ and $`B=24\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$. Indeed, by fitting Eq.(2) to observed proper motions, one can determine $`A`$ and $`B`$ if one is sure that the frame is not rotating. This last requirement was pretty unsure before the Hipparcos mission. The most reliable determination of the Oort constants based on the proper motions of the Cepheids that were measured by Hipparcos has been derived by Feast & Whitelock (1997) who found $`A=14.82\pm 0.84\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$ and $`B=12.37\pm 0.64\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$. These values were confirmed by Mignard (2000) who found $`A=14.5\pm 1.0\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$ and $`B=11.5\pm 1.0\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$ by using proper motions of distant giants. This indicates that the rotation curve is slightly declining in the solar neighbourhood.

The determination of $`v_c(\varpi _{})`$ follows from the determination of the Oort constants: using the values of Feast & Whitelock (1997), we find $`v_c(\varpi _{})=(218\pm 8\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{s}^1)(\varpi _{}/8\mathrm{k}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c})`$, a value which is consistent with $`v_c(\varpi _{})=220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ that we choose to adopt in this paper. Since we impose $`v_c(\varpi _{})=220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ and $`\varpi _{}=8\pm 0.5\mathrm{kpc}`$ for all the potentials defined in section 3, the value of $`AB=\frac{v_c(\varpi _{})}{\varpi _{}}`$ is in the fixed interval $`27.6\pm 1.7\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$. This interval is in accordance with the one deduced from the values of $`A`$ and $`B`$ determined by Feast & Whitelock (1997), i.e. $`\frac{v_c(\varpi _{})}{\varpi _{}}=27.2\pm 0.9\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$. So, the only relevant constraint relative to the Oort constants for our potentials will be the value of $`\frac{\mathrm{d}v_c}{\mathrm{d}\varpi }(\varpi _{})`$.

However, The Oort constants are not considered as a very strong constraint in this paper. Indeed, the measurement of the proper motion of the compact radio source Sgr A\* (Backer 1996), seems to indicate that $`AB=30.1\pm 0.8\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$ when assuming that Sgr A\* is stationary with respect to the galactic center. This is inconsistent with the determination based on Hipparcos data, and leaves us with an uncertainty which still awards a resolution.

### 2.4 Local dynamical mass

The mass density in the solar neighbourhood $`\rho _{}`$ is an essential constraint for any mass model. It can be surmised that this parameter is not directly observed: it is deduced from the positions and velocities of tracer stars in the direction perpendicular to the galactic plane (the $`z`$-direction), using the Boltzmann and Poisson equations in various forms.

Jeans equations (first order moments of the Boltzmann equation) imply that the vertical acceleration $`K_z`$ is related to the vertical velocity dispersion $`\sigma _z^2`$ and to the vertical number density $`g(z)`$ of a population of stars by:

$$K_z(z)=\sigma _z^2\frac{\mathrm{d}ln(g(z)/g(0))}{\mathrm{d}z},$$
(4)
if the vertical motion can be separated from the radial and azimuthal motion of the stars (Oort-Lindblad approximation), if the velocity ellipsoid is aligned with the cylindrical coordinate axes (i.e $`v_\varpi v_z=0`$), and if the population is isothermal (i.e. $`\sigma _z^2`$ is constant as a function of $`z`$).

Oort (1932; 1960) applied this now classical formula to late-type stars (A to M) with the assumption that they were old enough to have become dynamically well mixed in the $`z`$-direction. Then he derived $`\rho _{}`$ using Poisson equation for nearly circular orbits:

$$4\pi G\rho _{}=\frac{\mathrm{d}K_z}{\mathrm{d}z}2(A^2B^2)$$
(5)
Oort found $`\rho _{}=0.09M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3`$ in 1932 and $`\rho _{}=0.15M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3`$ in 1960: this last result indicated that there might be a lot of dark matter in the disc, by comparison with star counts.

Afterwards, many other similar studies (Yasuda 1961; Eelsalu 1961; Woolley & Stewart 1967; Turon Lacarrieu 1971; Gould & Vandervoort 1972; Jones 1972; Balakirev 1976; Hill, Hilditch & Barnes 1979) gave discrepant results, suffering from inhomogeneities in the data, systematic errors due to the use of photometric distances, and undersampling near the galactic plane. Because of this undersampling, some studies were even based on young O and B stars, assuming that the gas and dust out of which they recently formed was already roughly relaxed (Stothers & Tech 1964; von Hoerner 1966).

More recently, Bahcall (1984a,b,c) described the disc matter as a series of isothermal components and analyzed the nonlinear self-consistent equations in which the matter produces the potential (Poisson equation) and is also affected by the potential (Jeans equations for each isothermal component). Bahcall, Flynn & Gould (1992) applied this method to a sample of K giants and found $`\rho _{}=0.26M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3`$, a result leading once again to the presence of dark matter in the disc.

At about the same time, Kuijken & Gilmore (1989a,b,c, 1991) used another method which does not use the Jeans equations, inspired by the method of von Hoerner (1960). This method is based on the assumption that the phase space distribution function $`F_z(z,v_z)`$ of any tracer population depends only on

$$E_z=V_z(z)+\frac{1}{2}v_z^2$$
(6)
where

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}V_z(z)}{\mathrm{d}z}=K_z(z).$$
(7)
This assumption follows from the classical separability of the vertical motion of the stars and from the Jeans (1915) theorem in one dimension. The density in configuration space $`g(z)`$ of a tracer population is then related to its density in phase space by the integral equation:

$$g(z)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}F_z(z,v_z)dv_z=2_{V_z}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{F_z(E_z)}{\sqrt{2(E_zV_z)}}dE_z$$

$$=f(V_z)=f(V_z(z))$$
(8)
So, there is a unique relation between $`g(z)`$ and $`F_z(E_z)`$: Kuijken & Gilmore (1989c, 1991) inverted the Abel transform (8) and used the space density profile $`g(z)`$ of distant K stars to predict their velocity distribution at different heights for different $`V_z(z)`$. Then they compared these predictions to the velocity data and used a maximum likelihood technique to select the best-fitting potential. The data they used were too far from the plane to constrain $`\rho _{}`$ and they found a surface mass density between $`z=\pm 1.1`$ kpc of $`71M_{}\mathrm{pc}^2`$, a result rejecting the presence of dark matter in the disc.

So, all the investigations between 1932 and the Hipparcos mission had failed to converge to a reliable determination of $`\rho _{}`$: they were all very uncertain, essentially because of inhomogeneities in the tracer samples, undersampling near the equatorial plane and the use of photometric distances. Hipparcos data solved all these problems: the completeness of the Hipparcos survey for stars brighter than $`m_v=8.0`$ solved the homogeneity problem, the dense probe near the plane eliminated the undersampling, while the accurate parallaxes eliminated the use of photometric distances.

Crézé et al. (1998) and Holmberg & Flynn (2000) used Eq. (8) to determine $`\rho _{}`$ from complete samples of nearby A-F stars. Given the functions $`g(z)`$ and $`F_z(z=0,v_{z=0}^2)=F_z(E_z)`$ from the observed vertical density and velocity distribution, the function $`V_z(z)`$ can be derived. Then, to determine $`\rho _{}`$, the Oort constants have to be used in the Poisson equation (5): these are also much better known since the Hipparcos mission (see section 2.3). Crézé et al. (1998) estimated $`\rho _{}=0.076\pm 0.015M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3`$ while Holmberg & Flynn (2000) estimated $`\rho _{}=0.102\pm 0.010M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3`$. These differences between local density estimates using almost the same Hipparcos data are due to different a priori hypothesis on the vertical potential $`V_z`$. Recent investigations at Strasbourg University using a local Hipparcos sample combined with two samples at the galactic poles confirm the values obtained by Holmberg & Flynn (2000) (Siebert, Bienaymé & Soubiran 2002).

We conclude that any mass model of the Milky Way must have its solar neighbourhood mass density in the range $`0.06M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3\rho _{}0.12M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3`$ in order to match Hipparcos latest findings (rejecting the presence of a disc-like dark matter component). However, it should be remarked that all the results presented here are based on the Oort-Lindblad approximation, which may not be valid: therefore we do not exclude that another subset of potentials, that do not match our imposed constraints based on Oort-Lindblad approximation, could also be useful for dynamical modeling of the Milky Way.

## 3 The Potentials

The Stäckel potentials are non-rotating potentials for which the Hamilton-Jacobi equation is separable and for which all orbits admit three analytic integrals of the motion (Stäckel 1890): they form the most general set of potentials that contain one free function, for which three exact integrals of the motion are known, and which can be relevant as models for a global potential in galactic dynamics (Lynden-Bell 1962). In this section, we present the mathematical form of the class of Stäckel potentials that are studied in this paper.

### 3.1 Coordinate system

Axisymmetric Stäckel potentials are best expressed in spheroidal coordinates $`(\lambda ,\varphi ,\nu )`$, with $`\lambda `$ and $`\nu `$ the roots for $`\tau `$ of

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\varpi ^2}{\tau +\alpha }}+{\displaystyle \frac{z^2}{\tau +\gamma }}=1`$ $`\alpha <\gamma <0,`$ (9)
and $`(\varpi ,\varphi ,z)`$ cylindrical coordinates. The parameters $`\alpha `$ and $`\gamma `$ are both constant and we assume them smaller than zero. It is convenient to define the axis ratio of the coordinate surfaces as $`ϵ=\frac{a}{c}`$ with $`\alpha =a^2`$ and $`\gamma =c^2`$. Together with the focal distance $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\sqrt{\gamma \alpha }`$, the axis ratio defines the coordinate system.

### 3.2 Three-component Stäckel potentials

An axisymmetric potential is of Stäckel form if there exists a spheroidal coordinate system $`(\lambda ,\varphi ,\nu )`$ in which the potential can be written as

$$V(\lambda ,\nu )=\frac{f(\lambda )f(\nu )}{\lambda \nu },$$
(10)
for an arbitrary function $`f(\tau )=(\tau +\gamma )G(\tau )`$, $`G0`$, $`\tau =\lambda ,\nu `$. The function $`G(\lambda )`$ then represents the potential in the $`z=0`$ plane.

The Milky Way is composed of several mass components: the bulge, the thin disc, the thick disc, the stellar halo, the dark halo, and the (dynamically insignificant) interstellar medium. It is not fundamental that a mass model aknowledges explicitly the existence of each of these components. For example, BD presented a set of two-component (halo-disc) Stäckel potentials with a flat rotation curve.

Our goal is to show that different Stäckel potentials are able to fit the latest estimates for the fundamental parameters of the Galaxy. We first generalize the potentials of BD by adding a thick disc to them since its existence as a separate stellar component is now well established (Ojha et al. 1994; Chen et al. 2001). Our potentials have thus three mass components: two “flat” components and one spheroidal. The spheroidal component accounts for the stellar and dark halo, and we shall see in section 4 that our potentials turn out to have an effective bulge, which enables us to avoid the explicit introduction of a bulge-component.

We assume that all three components of our potentials generate a Stäckel potential, with three different coordinate systems but the same focal distance. It is straightforward to show that the superposition of three Stäckel potentials is still a Stäckel potential when all three coordinate systems have the same focal distance. Although the functions $`f_{\mathrm{thin}}`$, $`f_{\mathrm{thick}}`$ and $`f_{\mathrm{halo}}`$ are arbitrary, we assume that they each generate a Kuzmin-Kutuzov potential, defined by

$$G(\tau )=\frac{GM}{\sqrt{\tau }+c}$$
(11)
with $`M`$ the total mass of the system. Such a potential becomes a point mass potential ($`V=\frac{GM}{\varpi }`$) in the Galactic Plane when $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$. We use this potential essentially because it is an extremely simple but representative Stäckel potential: we will show that it is not necessary to use complicated Stäckel potentials in order to match all the known and most recently determined parameters of the Milky Way.

Near the center, in a meridional plane, the lines of constant mass density corresponding to a Stäckel potential are approximately ellipsoidal (de Zeeuw, Peletier & Franx 1986). For a Kuzmin-Kutuzov potential (see e.g. Dejonghe & de Zeeuw 1988), when $`a>c`$, the isodensity surfaces are flattened oblate spheroids, and increasing $`ϵ=\frac{a}{c}`$ produces more flattening. So, the ratio $`ϵ`$ has to be high for the thin disc, intermediate for the thick disc and close to unity for the halo.

We first define a class of dimensionless potentials $`V_p`$ in dimensionless units $`(\varpi _p,z_p)`$, with a focal distance $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1`$ for all three coordinate systems and the central value of the potentials equal to $`1`$. Each of these potentials is a superposition of three Kuzmin-Kutuzov potentials in three different coordinate systems:

$`V_p(\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}},\lambda _{\mathrm{thick}},\lambda _{\mathrm{halo}},\nu _{\mathrm{thin}},\nu _{\mathrm{thick}},\nu _{\mathrm{halo}})=`$
$`k_{\mathrm{thin}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_{\mathrm{thin}}(\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}})f_{\mathrm{thin}}(\nu _{\mathrm{thin}})}{\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}\nu _{\mathrm{thin}}}}`$
$`k_{\mathrm{thick}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_{\mathrm{thick}}(\lambda _{\mathrm{thick}})f_{\mathrm{thick}}(\nu _{\mathrm{thick}})}{\lambda _{\mathrm{thick}}\nu _{\mathrm{thick}}}}`$
$`(1k_{\mathrm{thin}}k_{\mathrm{thick}}){\displaystyle \frac{f_{\mathrm{halo}}(\lambda _{\mathrm{halo}})f_{\mathrm{halo}}(\nu _{\mathrm{halo}})}{\lambda _{\mathrm{halo}}\nu _{\mathrm{halo}}}}`$ (12)
This new class of potentials is thus defined by five parameters (the three axis ratios of the coordinate surfaces and the relative contribution of the thin and thick disc masses to the total mass, i.e. $`k_{\mathrm{thin}}`$ and $`k_{\mathrm{thick}}`$), which is a reasonable augmentation with respect to the BD potentials that were defined by three parameters.

We denote

$`\alpha _{\mathrm{thin}}\alpha _{\mathrm{thick}}=\gamma _{\mathrm{thin}}\gamma _{\mathrm{thick}}=q_10`$
$`\alpha _{\mathrm{thin}}\alpha _{\mathrm{halo}}=\gamma _{\mathrm{thin}}\gamma _{\mathrm{halo}}=q_2q_10.`$ (13)
So, we can express the class of potentials $`V_p`$ as a function of $`\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}`$, $`\nu _{\mathrm{thin}}`$ and the two constants $`q_1`$ and $`q_2`$ (we also use Eq. (11)) to give the final form of $`V_p`$:

$`V_p(\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}},\nu _{\mathrm{thin}})=GM({\displaystyle \frac{k_{\mathrm{thin}}}{\sqrt{\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}}+\sqrt{\nu _{\mathrm{thin}}}}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{k_{\mathrm{thick}}}{\sqrt{\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}+q_1}+\sqrt{\nu _{\mathrm{thin}}+q_1}}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1k_{\mathrm{thin}}k_{\mathrm{thick}}}{\sqrt{\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}+q_2}+\sqrt{\nu _{\mathrm{thin}}+q_2}}})`$ (14)
The dimensionless rotation curve corresponding to such potentials is given by:

$`v_c^2(\varpi _p)=\varpi _p_{\varpi _p}V_p(\varpi _p,0)`$
$`=GM\varpi _p^2({\displaystyle \frac{k_{\mathrm{thin}}}{\sqrt{\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}}(\sqrt{\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}}+c_{\mathrm{thin}})^2}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{k_{\mathrm{thick}}}{\sqrt{\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}+q_1}(\sqrt{\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}+q_1}+\sqrt{c_{\mathrm{thin}}^2+q_1})^2}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1k_{\mathrm{thin}}k_{\mathrm{thick}}}{\sqrt{\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}+q_2}(\sqrt{\lambda _{\mathrm{thin}}+q_2}+\sqrt{c_{\mathrm{thin}}^2+q_2})^2}})`$ (15)
where $`\varpi _p`$ denotes the dimensionless galactocentric radius. We shall impose constraints on the shape and flatness of the rotation curve in section 3.3.

In order to transform these dimensionless potentials into dimensional ones for the Milky Way, we denote the dimensionless radius where the rotation curve attains its first maximum as $`\varpi _{p,M}`$: since the Milky Way attains its global amplitude of 220 km/s for the first time at a radius of about 1.5 kpc (Fich & Tremaine 1991), we define a distance scale factor $`r_S=\frac{1.5\mathrm{kpc}}{\varpi _{p,M}}`$. The conversion between dimensionless and dimensional distances is then given by:

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\varpi (\mathrm{kpc})=r_S\varpi _p\hfill \\ z(\mathrm{kpc})=r_Sz_p\hfill \end{array}$$
(16)
Then, the total mass $`M`$ of the Galaxy is adjusted in such a way that the dimensional circular velocity at the solar radius ($`\varpi _{}=8\pm 0.5\mathrm{kpc}`$, see section 2.1) is equal to $`220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$: we obtain thus a minimum and a maximum value for $`M`$, for the two extreme values of the galactocentric distance of the sun. That adjustment also fixes the local mass density in the solar neighbourhood $`\rho _{}`$ (see section 3.3).

### 3.3 Selection criteria

We shall now establish the features that a potential (as defined in section 3.2) must have to be considered as a plausible potential for the Milky Way, in the light of the observational constraints reviewed in section 2.

By definition of the dimensional potentials (see section 3.2), the local circular speed $`v_c(\varpi _{})`$ is equal to $`220\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ for all the potentials. The first fundamental selection criterion is the flatness of the rotation curve: this feature can be examined in the dimensionless frame-work. Even the BD potentials, with only two mass components, could produce many different shapes of rotation curves. So, we adopt the same simple diagnostic as BD: we denote $`\varpi _{p,M}`$ the dimensionless radius where the circular speed attains its first maximum and we look for a range in $`\varpi `$ where $`v_c(\varpi )`$ remains larger than 80% of the maximum velocity and is thus more or less constant. We denote $`\varpi _{p,F}`$ the dimensionless radius where $`v_c(\varpi _{p,F})=0.8v_c(\varpi _{p,M})`$. A rotation curve is considered sufficiently flat if:

$$E_F=\frac{\varpi _{p,F}\varpi _{p,M}}{\varpi _{p,M}}>8$$
(17)
This is a minimum requirement.

The second selection criterion is based on the latest determinations of the Oort constants. For all our potentials,

$$\frac{v_c(\varpi _{})}{\varpi _{}}=27.6\pm 1.7\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1$$
(18)
which is in accordance with the value determined by Feast & Whitelock (1997), $`\frac{v_c(\varpi _{})}{\varpi _{}}=27.2\pm 0.9\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$. The first derivative of the circular velocity in the solar neighbourhood corresponding to the Oort constants found by Feast & Whitelock (1997) is $`\frac{\mathrm{d}v_c}{\mathrm{d}\varpi }(\varpi _{})=2.4\pm 1.2\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1`$. Our potentials have two extreme values for this derivative, depending on the position of the sun; in order to fit the above interval, we select the potentials such that:

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{max}(\frac{\mathrm{d}v_c}{\mathrm{d}\varpi }(\varpi _{}))>3.6\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1\hfill \\ \mathrm{min}(\frac{\mathrm{d}v_c}{\mathrm{d}\varpi }(\varpi _{}))<1.2\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1\hfill \end{array}$$
(19)
This feature is not as essential as the flatness of the rotation curve, because of the intriguing measurement of the proper motion of Sgr A\* (see section 2.3).

The last selection criterion is the local mass density in the solar neighbourhood: this number is determined by the adopted total mass $`M`$. We look for its values in both extreme positions for the sun $`(\varpi _{},z_{})=(7.5,0.004)\mathrm{kpc}`$ and $`(\varpi _{},z_{})=(8.5,0.02)\mathrm{kpc}`$. Following the Hipparcos latest findings reviewed in section 2.4, we select the potentials such that:

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{max}(\rho _{})>0.06M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3\hfill \\ \mathrm{min}(\rho _{})<0.12M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3\hfill \end{array}$$
(20)
This feature is more important than the Oort constants: we give the priority to that constraint, contrarily to Sevenster et al. (2000) who studied the structure of the inner Galaxy, and therefore constructed Stäckel potentials with reasonable values for the Oort constants but values for $`\rho _{}`$ that are too low.

The total mass of the Galaxy, the mass fractions of the discs and the flattening and scale length of the components are not well established observationally and are not considered as fundamental constraints for the potential.

## 4 Results

Our goal is now to find and select, among the class of potentials defined in section 3, some representative potentials that differ with respect to their form and features, and that satisfy the fundamental constraints reviewed in section 2 and quantified in section 3.3. As it is difficult to visualize a five-dimensional parameter space, we shall first visualize its structure when $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thin}}`$ and $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}`$ are fixed (the “winding staircase”). Then we shall restrict the parameter space by imposing additional constraints on the flatness of the thick disc. We shall finally select five representative potentials, listed in Table 5.

### 4.1 The “winding staircase”

As an example of the consequences of the choice of the selection criteria of section 3.3, we look for all the values of $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thick}}`$, $`k_{\mathrm{thin}}`$ and $`k_{\mathrm{thick}}`$ that yield potentials satisfying the selection criteria for $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thin}}=75`$ and $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.02`$ (with the thick disc always thicker than the thin disc, i.e. $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thick}}<75`$). The accordance with the selection criteria results from a precise mixing of the two discs and of the halo. Figure 1 illustrates the volume in parameter space corresponding to these satisfactory potentials: the volume looks like a “winding staircaise”. When $`k_{\mathrm{thick}}=0`$, we see that all the values of $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thick}}`$ are allowed when $`13\%k_{\mathrm{thin}}15\%`$, which results from the fact that no thick disc is in fact present. When $`k_{\mathrm{thin}}`$ is close to its maximum possible value (15%), $`k_{\mathrm{thick}}`$ has to be zero except when $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thick}}`$ is very close to 1, i.e. when the thick disc is a pretty round component (similar to the halo) and helps to keep the rotation curve flat. When $`k_{\mathrm{thin}}`$ is smaller than 15%, the possibilities for $`k_{\mathrm{thick}}`$ are more numerous, i.e. the thick disc can take a part of the mass. When $`k_{\mathrm{thin}}`$ attains the critical value of 12%, the volume is inflected and the thick disc has to be thin and non-zero in order to counter-balance the lack of mass in the thin disc. Decreasing the mass of the thin disc forces the thick disc to become thinner and more massive, yielding the “winding staircase” volume of Figure 1. The similar volumes in parameter space for $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thin}}>75`$ have the same form, and are bigger essentially because there is more freedom for $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thick}}`$.

### 4.2 Constraints on the scale height of the thick disc

In Figure 1, there are some solutions with a thick disc more massive than the thin disc. Even though the mass fractions of the discs and the flattening of the components are not well established and should be tested in a dynamical study, we know that the mass fraction of the thick disc is smaller than that of the thin disc (and represent at most 13% of the local thin disc density in the solar neighbourhood) and the latest determination of the thick disc scale height based on star count data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey is 665pc (Chen et al. 2001). However, Chen et al. (2001) insist on the difficulty to converge to a definitive answer: some other studies indicate that the scale height could be of the order of 1 kpc (Gilmore 1984; Ojha et al. 1996). We shall reject the potentials that are completely inconsistent with those characteristics ($`0.6\mathrm{kpc}<h_z<1\mathrm{kpc}`$) and in particular those with a thick disc more massive than the thin disc.

In order to determine the interval of axis ratios that should be considered for the thick disc, we have fitted the vertical mass distribution corresponding to a simple Kuzmin-Kutuzov potential with $`r_S=1`$ to an exponential law $`e^{z/h_z}`$. We conclude that the potentials with $`1.3ϵ_{\mathrm{thick}}2`$ have a scale height between 665 pc and 1 kpc and are the ones we should examine in detail. For each axis ratio, Table 1 gives the corresponding scale height. However, Figure 2 reveals that the exponential fit is not valid for the axis ratios used to model the thin disc, which is not surprising since a thin disc could be better understood as a superposition of isothermal sheets than by a simple exponential law.

### 4.3 The final selection

In this section, we look for some three-component potentials with different forms and features, all satisfying the selection criteria defined in section 3.3 and consistent with what is known about the thick disc.

First of all, we look for the two-component BD potentials that satisfy the new selection criteria: they are listed in Table 2. All the two-component potentials with $`ϵ_{\mathrm{disc}}=50,75,130,200`$ and $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.005,1.01,1.02,1.03`$ are examined. We do not consider discs with $`a/c>200`$ because then the uncertainty on $`\rho _{}`$ becomes too large. We see in Table 2 that, in order to reproduce the Oort constants in the two-component framework, the shape of the halo cannot vary ($`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.02`$).

If we take the two-component potentials as a starting point, there are two ways to add a thick disc. The first way is to decrease the contribution of the halo and to put the remaining mass into the thick disc: the local density in the solar neighbourhood is then slightly larger while the rotation curve is decreasing faster. If we take the third potential of Table 2 as a starting point, the first potential of Table 5 (potential I) illustrates this first case. The other way is to decrease the contribution of the thin disc and to put the remaining mass into the thick disc: the local density is then slightly decreasing while the rotation curve is more flat. If we take the fourth potential of Table 2 as a starting point, the first potential of Table 5 illustrates this second case: this potential (potential I) is a three-component potential satisfying the selection criteria and is selected to be analyzed in detail and confronted with kinematical surveys in the future.

The presence of a third component allows more freedom for the shape of the halo, so we look for three-component potentials with a halo rounder than $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.02`$. In order to keep the rotation curve flat and retain the local density as well as the Oort constants in the allowed interval, we need to couple a very thin disc with the rounder halo: indeed, our investigations show that no solution can be found for $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thin}}=50`$ and $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.01`$. However, if we take $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thin}}=200`$, Table 3 gives solutions for a halo with $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.01`$: we select the solution where the mass of the thick disc relative to the thin disc is the smallest (potential III of Table 5). Remark that a similar Table for $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.02`$ would contain 292 entries and is omitted here. There are much less solutions when $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thin}}=75`$, as can be seen in Table 4. However, as stated in section 3.3, we do not assign high priority to the Oort constants, and we select a potential with $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thin}}=75`$, $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.01`$ and a relative mass of the thick disc relative to the thin disc of 13% (i.e. a smaller fraction than any of the solutions of Table 4), but with a quite large local radial derivative of the circular speed (potential IV of Table 5).

For $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.005`$, it is totally impossible to find a potential satisfying the Oort constants criterion: the radial derivative of the circular speed in the solar neighbourhood is always positive. Nevertheless, if one is willing to ignore the estimates of $`A`$ and $`B`$, one could select a potential with $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.005`$ and reasonably low values for the cirular speed radial derivative in the solar neighbourhood (potential V of Table 5).

Finally, we select a potential (potential II) satisfying all the criteria, for which the interval in $`\rho _{}`$ is precisely $`[0.06M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3,0.12M_{}\mathrm{pc}^3]`$, and which is close to the Chen et al. (2001) findings , i.e. $`ϵ_{\mathrm{thin}}=200`$ which is the thinnest thin disc that we consider in order not to have a too large interval for $`\rho _{}`$, a relative mass of the thick disc to the thin disc of 10%, a scale height of the thick disc of 612.5 pc and a relatively large $`E_F`$ ($`E_F=13.44`$).

Table 5 summarizes the main features of the selected Stäckel potentials with different forms and features and that we shall use for dynamical modeling of the Milky Way: potentials III and V have a very thin disc associated with a quite massive thick disc and a pretty round halo, while potentials I and IV have a thicker thin disc with a quasi-negligible thick disc (Figure 3 shows the mass isodensity curves of each potential in a meridional plane for two different scales). It should be noted that the total masses associated with those potentials are very different and become larger with a rounder halo and that a rounder halo implies that this halo is much more extended. A closer look to the mass density in the equatorial plane indicates that, for each potential, the density grows faster than an exponential in the central 3 kpc corresponding to the bulge region: the potentials have thus an effective bulge, which did enable us to avoid the introduction of an explicit bulge component. We have fitted the mass density in the plane to an exponential law down to $`\varpi =3`$ kpc in order to check that the scale length of the disc is realistic: the last column of Table 5 gives the scale length corresponding to each selected potential and we conclude that they are realistic but do not distinguish the different potentials. For the potentials with the biggest and smallest scale length, Figure 4 illustrates the shape of the logarithm of the density in the plane (the other potentials have a similar shape for that curve). Finally, Figure 5 shows the rotation curve associated with each of the five selected potentials: the rotation curve of potential II is more flat than the one of potential I in the vicinity of the sun, while the rotation curves of the potentials with $`ϵ_{\mathrm{halo}}=1.01`$ (potentials III and IV) are even more flat and the one of potential V is slightly increasing.

## 5 Conclusions

In this paper, we have shown that some different simple Stäckel potentials can fit most known parameters of the Milky Way (especially Hipparcos latest findings). First, we have reviewed the galactic fundamental parameters that any Milky Way potential must match and that investigations following the Hipparcos mission have readjusted. Then, we have generalized the two-component BD potentials by adding a thick disc, and we have studied how the parameters can vary in order to satisfy selection criteria based on the latest observational constraints. We have shown that the presence of a thick disc allows more flexibility in the form of the potentials, especially for the shape of the halo and we have selected five different valid potentials listed in Table 5. It should be noted that, in fact, there could be two different thick discs in the Galaxy, a very thick one (Chiba & Beers 2000; Gilmore, Wyse & Norris 2002) and a smaller one (Soubiran, Bienaymé & Siebert 2002): in that case, the three-component modelling presented in this paper could be easily extended, but this would imply a growth of parameter space.

A major result of this paper is that, even though Stäckel potentials are negligible in the set of all potentials, many of them are still able to match the most recent estimates for the parameters of the Milky Way, and furthermore very simple ones (superpositions of three Kuzmin-Kutuzov potentials) are sufficient to do this.

The potentials defined in this paper have already been used in Famaey et al. (2002). We plan to further validate each of the five proposed potentials by confronting them with kinematical surveys. This we shall do by constructing three-integral analytic distribution functions in those potentials, using a quadratic programming technique (Dejonghe 1989; for an overview see Dejonghe et al. 2001).

## Acknowledgements

We thank Dr Alain Jorissen for his permanent assistance, many interesting discussions and some helpful suggestions.


format: text

text:
# References

astro-ph/0212518

DSF 26/02

Coupled quintessence and the coincidence problem

G. Mangano, G. Miele, and V. Pettorino

Dipartimento di Fisica, Universitá di Napoli ”Federico II”, and INFN, Sezione di Napoli, Complesso Universitario di Monte S. Angelo, Via Cintia, I-80126 Naples, Italy

## Abstract

We consider a model of interacting cosmological constant/quintessence, where dark matter and dark energy behave as, respectively, two coexisting phases of a fluid, a thermally excited Bose component and a condensate, respectively. In a simple phenomenological model for the dark components interaction we find that their energy density evolution is strongly coupled during the universe evolution. This feature provides a possible way out for the coincidence problem affecting many quintessence models.

PACS 98.80.-k, 98.80.Cq

The extensive astrophysical observations of Supernovae (SN) Ia provide a powerful tool to single out the main cosmological energy density contributions at redshift $`z1`$. The evidence for a presently accelerated cosmic expansion  suggests the presence of a new dominant energy source whose equation of state $`p=\omega \rho `$ is compatible with a cosmological constant. The analysis of the recent experimental data favors in fact the range $`1\omega 0.4`$ . In particular for a pure cosmological constant the favored energy density, in unit of the critical density, would be of the order of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }0.7`$. Unfortunately, this value would be several orders of magnitude smaller than what can be predicted by our present knowledge of fundamental interactions. Moreover, it is also quite unnatural that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is just of the same order of the cold dark matter term $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m0.3`$ today, while it has been negligible for, say, red-shifts larger than 1. This is a severe fine tuning problem, usually referred to as the coincidence problem.
A much more appealing scenario is to look at this additional term as due to a scalar field $`\varphi `$ whose dynamics makes it negligible at high redshift and dominating the cosmic energy density at $`z1`$ . However this wide class of model is not free from fine tuning problem, due to the arbitrariness in the choice of the scalar field potential, but it has nevertheless more appealing features. This is for example the case of tracker fields scenarios, where the scalar dynamics shows a pseudo-attractor solution, valid for a wide range of initial conditions and providing values of $`\omega _\varphi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi `$  in good agreement with SN Ia observations.

Recently interacting quintessence scenarios have been extensively studied, considering a scalar field coupled with gravity, ordinary matter and dark matter . In particular, the recent data on CMBR anisotropy have provided a chance to constrain quintessence models , though the high degree of arbitrariness on the scalar dynamics makes these constraints very model dependent. In this letter we assume a more phenomenological scenario, in which the quintessence and dark matter components are looked upon as two different components of the same fluid, a condensate contribution and a thermally Bose distributed ”gas”, with energy densities $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\rho _m`$, respectively. We start considering the case where the condensate energy term corresponds to a pure cosmological constant, $`\omega =1`$. As it will be clear in the following, the main features of the model still hold for a more general equation of state with $`\omega <0`$. The gas component $`\rho _m`$ is assumed to be cold matter, with vanishing pressure. Finally we consider for simplicity a spatially flat universe, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k=0`$.

We parametrize the interaction in terms of powers of the two energy densities $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\rho _m`$. The time evolution of radiation energy density, $`\rho _R`$, consensate and dark matter are then dictated by the following equations

$`\dot{\rho }_r`$ $`=`$ $`4{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\rho _r,`$ (1)
$`\dot{\rho }_m`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\rho _mkM^{54\alpha 4\beta }\rho _m^\alpha \rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^\beta ,`$ (2)
$`\dot{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ $`=`$ $`kM^{54\alpha 4\beta }\rho _m^\alpha \rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^\beta ,`$ (3)
where $`k`$ is a dimensionless coupling constant and $`M`$ a suitable mass parameter. In terms of the redshift $`z`$ equations (1)-(3) can be conveniently rewritten as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r(z)}{dz}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{1+z}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r(z),`$ (4)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m(z)}{dz}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+z}}\left(3\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m(z)+\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m^\alpha (z)\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\beta (z)}{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r(z)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m(z)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)}}}\right),`$ (5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)}{dz}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{1+z}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m^\alpha (z)\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\beta (z)}{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r(z)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m(z)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)}}},`$ (6)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_i\rho _i/\rho _{c_0}`$, with $`\rho _{c_0}=3H_0^2M_{Pl}^2/(8\pi )=h^2\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.81}10^{46}GeV^4`$ the present critical energy density, and

$$\lambda k\sqrt{\frac{3}{8\pi }}\left(\frac{M_{Pl}}{M}\right)\left(\frac{\rho _{c_0}}{M^4}\right)^{\alpha +\beta 3/2}.$$
(7)
By defining $`x\mathrm{log}_{10}\left(1+z\right)`$ we then get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r(x)}{dx}}`$ $`=`$ $`4\mathrm{log}(10)\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r(x),`$ (8)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m(x)}{dx}}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}(10)\left(3\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m(x)+\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m^\alpha (x)\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\beta (x)}{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r(x)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m(x)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)}}}\right),`$ (9)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)}{dx}}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda \mathrm{log}(10){\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m^\alpha (x)\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\beta (x)}{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r(x)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m(x)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)}}}.`$ (10)
Note that for the parameter $`\lambda <0`$, the interaction term on the r.h.s. of (9) and (10) describes a continuous transfer of energy from the condensate to the ordinary non-relativistic particles. The corresponding scenario is a universe filled by both the condensate and a normal gas of dark particles, but with an effective mass of the condensate larger than the mass of thermal excitation in the gas phase. Direct decay of the condensate in dark matter particles is expected to be proportional to $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ only, while stimulated decay mechanism is of course proportional to number density of dark matter particles too. The natural expectation in this case is an interaction term with $`\alpha =\beta =1`$. In the following we will keep varying these parameters, to study the general features of the model as function of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ and eventually study in more details the case whereboth are set equal to unity.

We will be mainly interested to the case $`\lambda <0`$. The case $`\lambda >0`$, which will be briefly treated in the following, also represents a possible framework. In this case, as the temperature lowers, a fraction of the energy stored in the gas of dark particles flows in the condensate, as during a temperature driven phase transition. Unfortunately this model suffers of the very same coincidence problem of many other quintessence scenario and thus it is much less appealing.

The system (8)-(10) can be numerically solved, as a function of $`x`$, by fixing the values of $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ at present ($`x_i=0`$), and then following the values of the energy densities back in time. In particular, to describe the features of this coupled system, we have chosen as reference values $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m(0)=\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.3`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(0)=\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$ and the equivalence red-shift $`z_{eq}3100`$. This implies

$$\frac{\rho _r(z)}{\rho _m(z)}=\frac{\rho _r(0)}{\rho _m(0)}(1+z)\frac{\rho _r(0)}{\rho _m(0)}=\frac{1}{1+z_{eq}}.$$
(11)
It may seem that fixing the values of the energy densities parameters today is already a fine-tuning condition imposed to the evolution. This of course would be true if no interactions would be considered in the model. We will show in fact that, since $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\rho _m`$ evolution are coupled, the fact that their ratio $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }/\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ is of order one today represents a much less ad hoc condition for a wide range of the parameters $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ and $`\lambda `$. The fact that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ represent the main contribution to the energy density today is ultimately related to the fact that the interaction term keeps their evolution quite close throughout the universe expansion. We can say that the only remaining fine tuned condition is given by the value of the equivalence redshift, where radiation start becoming negligible.

In order to study the role of the free parameter $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\gamma `$ on the evolution of the energy densities, we start fixing for example $`\lambda =10^3`$ and choose $`\alpha =1`$ and $`\beta =0`$. In Figure 1 are reported the energy densities for radiation $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r`$, matter $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ and condensate $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, as a function of $`x`$. For these values of free parameters, the interaction is due to $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ only, but differently from the noninteraction case, the energy density of condensate here evolves in time. The evolution is of course enhanced for larger values of $`\alpha `$, but for $`x\stackrel{<}{}2`$ the condensate energy density $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ reaches a constant value which, at present, provides an effective cosmological constant. Thus for $`\beta =0`$ the model predicts scenarios very similar to other quintessence models and no new features overcoming the coincidence problem appear.

The behavior of the system completely changes if one takes non vanishing values for $`\beta `$. In this case, by increasing the value of $`\beta `$, the values of dark energy $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and dark matter $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ are more and more connected. As it is clear from Figure 2, where the energy densities are plotted versus $`x`$ for different values of $`\beta `$ and for $`\alpha =1`$ and $`\lambda =0.001`$, due to the interaction term Eq.s (9) and (10), $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ decreases for large redshift with the increasing of $`\beta `$, whereas $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ still remains with larger values. As a consequence their evolution remain closer. The two quantities start to intersect each other for values of $`\beta `$ larger than $`0.8`$. This is a relevant new feature of the model which solves the problem of coincidence, simply because the situation where the two densities $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ are of the same order of magnitude it is not a peculiarity of the present epoch but occurred many times in past.

In Figure 3 we show the plots corresponding to the non-interacting case $`\lambda =0`$ and the evolution for $`\lambda =0.001`$ and $`0`$ for $`\alpha ,\beta =1`$ . In this case for $`0<x<2`$ the two graphs exactly overlap, since in Eq. (9) the first term dominates whereas in Eq. (10) the l.h.s. is almost vanishing. This feature of the model is extremely important because provides a proper behavior of dark matter and energy for redshift smaller than $`z_{eq}`$ which does not affect large scale structures formation.

The behavior shown by the energy densities plots for $`\lambda =0.001`$ and $`\beta =1`$, reported in Figures 2 and 3 can be easily understood. By increasing the redshift $`x`$ the adimensionalized Hubble parameter $`\stackrel{~}{H}=\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ at the denominator of Eq.s (9) and (10) also increases, but less than the product of energy densities at the numerator does. Thus for large values of $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ the interaction term in Eq. (6) starts to be effective, consequently $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ increases hence enhancing the interaction term. This occurs till $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ reaches the dark matter contribution (at $`x3`$ for this choice of parameters). From this value on $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ feels the presence of $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and starts to decrease whereas the dark energy remains constant. This behavior ends when the first term in the r.h.s of (9) becomes the dominant one and thus $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ starts to increase again and so the cycle repeats.

In Figures 4(a) and 4(b) we report the quantity $`\mathrm{log}_{10}(\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m/\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ versus $`x`$ for $`\beta =0.6`$ and $`\beta =0.9`$, respectively. The other parameters are fixed to be $`\alpha =1`$ and $`\lambda 0.001`$ as for the plots of Figure 2. As it is clear from Figures 4 for $`\beta =0.6`$ the interaction term is too small to produce sizeable effects. This situation drastically changes for $`\beta =1`$ where the ratio oscillates with peaks and dips corresponding to the cycles of the Figure 2. Actually the value $`\beta 1`$ is the value which most naturally fit the stimulated decay scenario previously outlined.

The peculiar features of the model do not critically depend on the value of $`\lambda `$. In Figure 5 the energy density plots are shown for several values of $`\lambda `$ in the range $`1<\lambda <10^9`$. As it is clear from the figure, the redshift at the equivalence increases for smaller value of $`|\lambda |`$. If one imposes the equivalence redshift in the interval $`z_{eq}=3100_{400}^{+600}`$  then $`\lambda `$ must satisfy the bound $`|\lambda |<10^4`$. Reminding the definition of $`\lambda `$ (see Eq.(7)), it is possible to recast the bound on this parameter, for a given choice of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$, in a bound for the mass parameter $`M`$ and the dimensionless coupling $`k`$ defined in Eq.(7). In particular for $`\alpha =\beta =1`$ one would get

$$k\sqrt{\frac{3\rho _{c_0}}{8\pi }}\frac{M_{Pl}}{M^3}10^4k\frac{2.6}{h}\left(\frac{M}{GeV}\right)^3,$$
(12)
For values of the mass scale $`M`$ already larger than, say, few $`GeV`$, Eq.(12) is not constraining at all the coupling $`k`$.

The main result of SN Ia data is that expansion is accelerated for $`z1`$. In order to understand if our model is indeed compatible with this result we consider the effective equation of state of the primordial fluid $`w(x)`$, defined as

$$w(x)\frac{\stackrel{~}{p}_r(x)+\stackrel{~}{p}_m(x)+\stackrel{~}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)}{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r(x)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m(x)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)}=\frac{\frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_R(x)}{3}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)}{\stackrel{~}{\rho }_M(x)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_R(x)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)}.$$
(13)
In particular a phase of accelerated expansion is guaranteed if $`w<1/3`$. It is also worth noticing that recent data on the supernova SN1997ff at $`z=1.7`$ indicates, moreover, that the universe expansion for this redshift is still decelerated. This is actually in beautiful agreement with our results, as can be seen in Figure 6, at least for this choice of parameters. Figures 6, and 8 and 9 also shows that the accelerated phase show that accelaration occurs for $`z1`$ without assuming any particular fine-tuning of free parameters. The behavior of $`w(x)`$ for larger redshifts and for two different values of $`\lambda `$ is reported in Figure 7. The deep occurring for $`x3.5`$ is a genuine effect of the interaction terms, which is more evident for large values of $`\beta `$ and/or of $`\lambda `$ as shown in Figures 8 and 9, respectively. Note that the deep appears for $`|\lambda |10^5`$, and with the increasing of $`|\lambda |`$ moves to smaller values of $`x`$.

Concerning the prediction for the age of the universe, as function of $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$, this does not provide any severe bound on the free parameter ranges. For all choices of the parameters which satisfy $`z_{eq}=3100_{400}^{+600}`$ we have checked that the result is the same, in the present uncertainty range, of a customary non-interacting cosmological constant. This is simply due to the fact that, during the last few red-shifts, which mainly contribute to the total age of the universe, $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\rho _m`$ effectively behave as a cosmological constant and non interacting cold matter.

The choice $`\omega _\mathrm{\Lambda }=1`$, even if affects of course the time evolution of dark matter and dark energy, is not crucial to get the main features of $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ evolution. In particular a different choice for $`\omega _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, provided that $`\omega 0.4`$ is still producing the behaviour already discussed , with $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ following and intersecting each other during the universe evolution. This is shown in Figure 10, where the energy densities versus $`x`$ are plotted for $`\alpha =\beta =1`$, $`\lambda =0.001`$ and $`\omega _\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.5`$ and $`0.8`$ respectively.

As stated above the class of models with $`\lambda >0`$ also describe a possibly interesting scenario. In this case, in fact, the condensate is not produced till the redshift (temperature) does not goes under a critical value, $`x_c`$. This is shown in Figure 11 where for the corresponding choice of parameters $`x_c2.8`$. For $`x`$ larger than $`x_c`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is vanishing, and $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_m`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_r`$ have the same behavior they would have in absence of interaction. At $`x=x_c`$ the fluid undergoes a phase transition and part of the energy density stored in dark matter flows in the condensate till it start dominate at low red-shifts. Unfortunately this scenario is still affected by the coincidence problem. The value of $`x_c`$ where the phase transition takes place is determined by the values of $`\rho _m`$ and $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ today or, viceversa, it should be accurately tuned to provide the observed values for the matter/cosmological constant energy ratio today.

To summarize, the coupled quintessence framework provides an interesting scenario where the mutual interaction between dark matter and dark energy components shows a quite close evolution of their energy densities during the universe expansion. This remarkable feature represents a simple way out to the coincidence problem, since it makes the present situation of $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }\rho _m`$ a cyclic condition which have occurred many times in the past. The detail of the energy density evolution is of course a function of the assumed interaction term. We have considered a simple model where the dark energy is provided by a condensate component of a fluid. The interaction with the gas of non relativistic particle (dark matter) is then due to stimulated decay processes of the condensate into gas particles. Though the model is still lacking a detailed microscopic description, it is nevertheless quite phenomenologically well motivated, and it would be worth analyzing their properties in more details, in view of the natural way it deals with the cosmic coincidence problem.

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank S. Matarrese for useful discussions.


text:
# Orbital Integrals are Motivic

## 1. Introduction

111I grant this paper to the public domain. No rights are reserved by the author.

Denef and Loeser have introduced a theory of arithmetic motivic integration . In this theory, general families of $`p`$-adic integrals can be calculated as the trace of a Frobenius operator on virtual Chow motives. This article shows that orbital integrals fit nicely into the general framework of Denef and Loeser. It describes a large class of orbital integrals that can be computed by a Frobenius operator on virtual Chow motives. Moreover, there is an effective procedure to compute the virtual Chow motive from the data defining the orbital integral. In this sense, this article gives an algorithm to compute a large class of orbital integrals.

The idea of using double cosets to compute motivic orbital integrals is taken from J. Gordon’s recent thesis (and a suggestion of Julee Kim). The thesis proves that under general conditions, the character values of depth zero representations of a $`p`$-adic group can be represented as virtual Chow motives . This note can be viewed as an extension of the methods of that thesis.

## 2. Double coset bounds

Recall that Pas has defined a first order language that is based on the theory of valued fields . It is a three-sorted language in the sense of . The models of the three sorts are a valued field, a residue field, and the additive group of integers (the value group), augmented by $`+\mathrm{}`$. The language has function symbols $`\mathrm{ord}`$ and $`\mathrm{ac}`$ that are interpreted as the valuation and angular component maps on a valued field. The valuation is a map from the valued field to $`\{+\mathrm{}\}`$. The angular component map is a function from the valued field to its residue field.

Let $`𝒦`$ be a set of models of Pas’s language. We do not make any assumptions about the residual characteristic of the fields in $`𝒦`$. We do, however, assume that each field is complete and Henselian. In fact, the only cases of interest to us are locally compact nonarchimedean fields (in brief, $`p`$-adic fields). For example, we could take $`𝒦`$ to be models corresponding to the set of $`p`$-adic fields $`_p`$, or the set of fields $`𝔽_p[[t]]`$, or the set of all $`p`$-adic fields. We write $`\theta ^k`$ for an interpretation of $`\theta `$ in the model $`k`$. If $`S`$ is a finite set of prime numbers, let $`𝒦_S`$ be the set of $`k𝒦`$ for which the residual characteristic of $`k`$ is not in $`S`$.

Let $`\theta (m)`$ be a formula in Pas’s language. Assume that $`\theta `$ has no free variables of the valued field sort or of the residue field sort. Assume that its free variables of the additive sort are contained in $`m=(m_1,\mathrm{},m_{\mathrm{}})`$.

Suppose that there exists a finite set $`S`$ of prime numbers satisfying the following condition:

###### Condition 1.

For every $`k𝒦_S`$,

$$\{m^{\mathrm{}}:\theta ^k(m)\}$$

is a bounded subset of $`^{\mathrm{}}`$.

###### Theorem 2.

Under the stated conditions, there exists a finite set $`S^{}`$ of prime numbers and a bounded subset $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that for every $`k𝒦_S^{}`$ we have

$$\{(m_1,\mathrm{},m_{\mathrm{}})^{\mathrm{}}:\theta ^k(m_1,\mathrm{},m_{\mathrm{}})\}C.$$

In other words, by throwing away finitely many primes, the bound on the subset in Condition 1 can be made independent of the model.

###### Proof.

Apply Pas’s quantifier elimination on quantifiers of valued field sort in the formula $`\theta `$. We obtain an equivalent formula that contains no variables of valued field sort. This formula is uniform in the sense that it is independent of the model $`k𝒦`$. Pas assumes that the residual characteristic is zero. We achieve equivalent results by throwing out finitely many residual characteristics.

The remaining terms of valued field sort are constants that are definable in Pas’s language without quantifiers. Such a constant must be a rational number. Equalities in the valued field $`a=b`$ can be replaced with an equivalent statement with the angular component map: $`\mathrm{ac}(ab)=0`$. The infinite valuation condition $`\mathrm{ord}(a)=+\mathrm{}`$ can be replace with $`\mathrm{ac}(a)=0`$. Excluding finitely many primes, each rational number appearing in the formula can be assumed to be $`0`$ or a unit; that is, it is an integer in each model. If $`a0`$, the condition $`\mathrm{ord}(a)=m`$ is then equivalent to the formula $`m=0`$, and if $`a=0`$ it is false (because we have already treated $`\mathrm{ord}(a)=+\mathrm{}`$). Similarly, the formula $`\mathrm{ac}(a)=\xi `$ is equivalent to $`a^{}=\xi `$, where $`a^{}`$ is the element in the residue field that is the reduction of the integer $`a`$. In this way, we eliminate all terms of valued-field sort, all function symbols $`\mathrm{ac}`$ and $`\mathrm{ord}`$.

Writing the formula in disjunctive normal form we find that $`\theta `$ is equivalent to

(1)
$$\underset{i}{}(\psi _iL_i),$$

where $`\psi _i`$ is a formula with no free variables and containing only constants and terms of the residue field sort, and $`L_i`$ is a formula with free variables limited to $`m`$ and whose constants and terms are of the value group sort. We may assume that $`+\mathrm{}`$ has been eliminated from the language, so that each $`L_i`$ is a conventional Presburger formula .

We partition the finite set of indices $`i`$ into two sets $`B`$ and $`\overline{B}`$, where $`B`$ is the set of indices for which $`L_i`$ is a bounded subset of $`^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\overline{B}`$ the set of indices for which $`L_i`$ is unbounded. We can find a set $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ that contains

$$_{iB}\{m:L_i(m)\}.$$

Note that $`C`$ is independent of the model.

Let $`S^{}`$ be the union of $`S`$ with the set of primes that were excluded by Pas’s quantifier elimination, together with the primes that were excluded to make the rational constants in the valued field all units (or 0).

If $`k𝒦_S^{}`$, then $`\theta `$ is equivalent to Formula 1 in the interpretation $`k`$. By hypothesis, the set of solutions is bounded, which implies that each $`\psi _i^k`$, for $`i\overline{B}`$, is false. Hence all the solutions lie in $`C`$, as desired. ∎

## 3. Some virtual sets

We write

$$\theta (x_1,\mathrm{},x_{\mathrm{}},m_1,\mathrm{},m_{\mathrm{}^{}},\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{\mathrm{}^{\prime \prime }})$$

for a formula in Pas’s language, where all free variables are among those listed, and the variables are of the valued field sort $`x_i`$, value group sort $`m_i`$, and residue field sort $`\xi _i`$.

If $`\theta (x_1,\mathrm{},x_{\mathrm{}})`$ is a formula in Pas’s language with no free variables of residue field sort and no free variables of the value field sort, then we have the formula

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& my_1,\mathrm{},y_{\mathrm{}},x_1,\mathrm{},x_{\mathrm{}}\hfill & \\ & (\theta (x_1,\mathrm{},x_{\mathrm{}})(\mathrm{ord}(y_ix_i)m,\text{ for }i=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{})\hfill & \\ & \theta (y_1,\mathrm{},y_{\mathrm{}}).\hfill & \end{array}$$

This formula does not contain any free variables. By quantifier elimination, this is equivalent to something of the shape of Formula 1. There are no free variables of the value group sort. By Presburger quantifier elimination, the formulas $`L_i`$ can be replaced with “true” $`1=1`$ or “false” $`0=1`$. Thus, we may assume that the formula is a formula in the first order theory of the residue field sort. We say that $`\theta (x_1,\mathrm{},x_{\mathrm{}})`$ is stable if the formula in the residue field sort is true for all pseudo-finite fields.222A field is pseudo-finite if it has a single extension of each degree and if each absolutely irreducible variety over the field has a rational point. If the formula $`\theta `$ is stable, then by avoiding finitely many residue field characteristics, interpretations of $`\{x:\theta (x)\}`$ are stable definable sets. (Stable is meant in the sense of Denef and Loeser’s motivic integration .)

A virtual set is a class construct

$$\{x:\theta (x)\},$$

where $`\theta `$ is a formula in Pas’s language. See , where the corresponding notion for formulas in the first-order theory of rings is discussed.

Let $`𝔤`$ be a virtual reductive Lie algebra in the sense of ; that is, a virtual set in Pas’s language whose models are reductive Lie algebras in the traditional sense. Assume that $`𝔤`$ is the Lie algebra of a virtual reductive Lie group $`G`$. (Again, this is to be interpreted as a virtual set whose models are reductive algebraic groups.) For example, each split reductive group over $``$ gives a virtual reductive group in Pas’s language.

We define the space of locally constant virtual functions on $`𝔤`$ to be the $``$-linear combinations of characteristic functions of stable virtual sets in $`𝔤`$. More precisely, take the Grothendieck group generated by stable formulas in Pas’s language, and tensor with $``$. Excluding finitely many primes, there is a map from this ring to the ring of locally constant $``$-valued functions on $`𝔤^k`$ for $`p`$-adic field models $`k`$.

Let $`\mathrm{}`$ be the rank of $`𝔤`$. Let $`\mathrm{span}(Y,e_1,\mathrm{},e_{\mathrm{}})`$ be the formula in the first-order language of rings asserting that $`Y`$ lies in the span of the $`e_i`$. The set of regular elements $`𝔤^{reg}`$ is defined as a virtual set of elements in $`𝔤`$

$$\{X:e_1,\mathrm{},e_{\mathrm{}}Y.[X,Y]=0\mathrm{span}(Y,e_1,\mathrm{},e_{\mathrm{}})\}.$$

(The quantifiers in this formula have been extended to range over elements of $`𝔤`$, as was done in .)

The set of nilpotent elements in $`𝔤`$ is a subvariety, hence a virtual subset. A regular semisimple element is defined as a regular element that has $`0`$ as the only nilpotent element in the centralizer. This condition is given by a formula, hence regular semisimple elements form a virtual set $`𝔤^{reg,ss}`$.

In a split reductive algebra over $``$, we have a finite list of definable subsets of $`𝔤`$ giving all of the proper parabolic subgroups $`P`$ up to conjugacy. The virtual set of regular semisimple elliptic elements is given by

$$_P\{X𝔤^{reg,ss}:\text{There does not exist }gG\text{ such that }\mathrm{Ad}g(X)P\}.$$

###### Example 3.

Consider the virtual set in $`GL(2)`$:

$$Z=\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ ub& a\end{array}\right):\mathrm{ord}(u)=0\mathrm{ord}(a)0\mathrm{ord}(b)0a^2ub^20b0\}.$$

This is a virtual subset of the set of regular semisimple elements. The condition for ellipticity for $`XZ`$ is

$$A.AZZA\left(\begin{array}{cc}& \\ 0& \end{array}\right).$$

This is equivalent (excluding the prime $`2`$) to the virtual subset of $`Z`$ given by the condition

$$\xi .\mathrm{ac}(u)=\xi ^2.$$

## 4. An integration formula

Let $`G=_tKtK`$ be the Cartan decomposition of the set $`G`$ of $`p`$-adic points of a split reductive group over a $`p`$-adic field. Assume $`tT`$ the set of points of a split torus. The method of Cartier gives the following integration formula for functions supported on a single double coset $`KtK`$.

###### Theorem 4.

Let $`dk`$ be a Haar measure on $`K`$. Let $`dg`$ be a Haar measure on $`G`$. Then there exists a constant $`c(KtK)`$ such that for all $`fC_c(KtK)`$.

$$c(KtK)_{K\times K}f(k_1tk_2)𝑑k_1𝑑k_2=_Gf(g)𝑑g.$$

###### Proof.

Follow Cartier . ∎

The constant can be obtained by taking $`f`$ to be the characteristic function of $`KtK`$. We find that

$$c(KtK)\mathrm{vol}(K,dk)^2=\mathrm{vol}(KtK,dg).$$

Pick $`dg`$ so that its restriction to $`K`$ is $`dk`$, and normalize $`dk`$ so that

$$\mathrm{vol}(K,dk)=|G(𝔽_q)|q^{\mathrm{dim}(G)}.$$

Let $`[G]_q`$ be the constant defined by the right-hand side of this equation.

## 5. The Main Result

Let $`𝔤`$ be a split reductive group over $``$. Let $`G`$ be a split reductive group over $``$ with Lie algebra $`𝔤`$. We take $`𝔤`$ and $`G`$ to be represented explicitly as matrices in $`𝔤𝐥(n)`$ and $`GL(n)`$, respectively. Let $`O_v`$ be the ring of integers of a completion $`L_v`$ of a number field $`L/`$. We may assume that $`G(O_v)=GL(n,O_v)G(L_v)`$ is a hyperspecial maximal compact subgroup for almost all places $`v`$ of $`L`$.

View $`𝔤`$ and $`G`$ as virtual subsets of the virtual sets $`𝔤𝐥(n)`$ and $`GL(n)`$. Let $`𝔤𝐥(n,O)`$ be the virtual subset of $`𝔤𝐥(n)`$ given by

$$\{(x_{ij}):\mathrm{ord}(x_{ij})0,i,j\}.$$

Set $`𝔤(O)=𝔤𝐥(n,O)𝔤`$.

Let $`f`$ be a locally constant virtual function on $`𝔤`$. Let $`E`$ be a stable virtual set of regular semisimple elliptic elements. (Recall that ‘stable’ is used here in the sense of stability in motivic integration, and not in the sense of stable conjugacy in group theory.) Assume that $`E𝔤(O)`$.

If $`L`$ is a finite extension of $``$, and $`v`$ is a place of $`L`$, the completion $`L_v`$ at $`v`$ is (the domain of) a model of Pas’s language. Let $`O_v`$ be the ring of integers of $`L_v`$. We write $`f_v`$ for the locally constant function in that model. We write $`E_v`$ for the definable subset of $`𝔤(O_v)`$ obtained from the virtual set $`E`$. Assume that for almost all $`L_v`$, $`E_v`$ is a compact set. (By ‘almost all’ here and in what follows, we mean all but finitely many residue field characteristics for $`L_v`$.)

A ring $`K_0^v(\mathrm{Mot}_{,\overline{}})_{\mathrm{loc},}`$ of virtual Chow motives is constructed by Denef and Loeser in . The ring $`K_0^v(\mathrm{Mot}_{,\overline{}})_{\mathrm{loc},}`$ is defined as the image of a ring $`K_0(\mathrm{Sch}_{})_{\mathrm{loc}}`$ in the Grothendieck ring of the category of Chow motives over $``$. The ring $`K_0(\mathrm{Sch}_{})_{\mathrm{loc}}`$ is the Grothendieck ring of Chow motives over $``$, localized by inverting the class $`𝕃=[𝔸_{}^1]`$ of the affine line. See  for details. In this paper, a virtual Chow motive $`M`$ will always mean an element of this ring.

If $`v`$ is a place of $`L`$, then there is a Frobenius operator $`\mathrm{Frob}_v`$ that acts on the $`\mathrm{}`$-adic cohomology groups of $`M`$. See \[3, 3.3\]. We write the alternating trace of Frobenius on the cohomology as

$$\mathrm{trace}(\mathrm{Frob}_v,M)\overline{}_{\mathrm{}}.$$

We fix measures on $`G_v`$ (the set of $`p`$-adic points of $`G`$), and $`𝔤_v`$ (the set of $`p`$-adic points of $`𝔤`$) by fixing differential forms of top degree defined over $``$ on $`G`$ and $`𝔤`$. Normalize $`dX`$ so that $`\mathrm{vol}(𝔤(O_v))=1`$. Normalize $`dg`$ to restrict to $`dk`$ on $`G(O_v)`$. Normalize $`dk`$ as in Section 4.

###### Theorem 5.

For each $`f`$ and $`E`$, there is a virtual Chow motive $`M(f,E)`$ over $``$ and a finite set $`S`$ of primes with the following property with the following property: If $`L`$ is a finite extension of $``$ and $`v`$ is a place of $`L`$ that does not lie over any $`pS`$, then

$$\mathrm{vol}(K,dk)_{E_v}_{G_v}f_v(g^1X_vg)𝑑g𝑑X=\mathrm{trace}(\mathrm{Frob}_v,M(f,E)).$$

###### Remark 6.

In general, a single elliptic element $`X`$ in a $`p`$-adic field is not definable and the conjugacy class $`O(X)`$ is not definable. Thus, it is not reasonable to ask for a virtual Chow motive to represent the integral, except when averaged over $`E`$.

###### Remark 7.

The same conclusion holds if we take our models to be $`𝔽_q((t))`$ instead of $`L_v`$. The Chow motive $`M(f,E)`$ is the same in both cases. Hence, we find as a corollary that the orbital integrals are “the same” in zero characteristic and positive characteristic.

###### Proof.

In the course of the proof we increase the size of the finite set $`S`$ of primes several times without a change in notation.

For any given $`L_v`$, the integral over $`G_v`$ is a sum of integrals over $`KtK`$, as we run over all double cosets. For any given $`XE_v`$, there are only finitely many double cosets involved (because $`X`$ is elliptic). The collection of double cosets required is locally constant in $`X`$, so there is a neighborhood of $`X`$ that on which the finite set of cosets is the same as for $`X`$. By compactness on $`E_v`$, there is a finite cover by such neighborhoods. It follows that there is a finite set of double cosets depending only on $`E_v`$ (and $`f_v`$).

For simplicity, we may assume that $`f_v`$ is a characteristic function at $`L_v`$ of a virtual set $`D`$. Let $`m=(m_1,\mathrm{},m_{\mathrm{}})`$ be a tuple of integers with $`\mathrm{}`$ equal to the reductive rank. Let $`T`$ be a split torus that gives at each $`p`$-adic place the split torus that appears in the Cartan decomposition. Let $`\varphi :𝔾_m^\times \mathrm{}T`$ be an isomorphism (defined over $``$) between a product of multiplicative groups and the diagonal torus $`T`$. Extend $`\mathrm{ord}`$ to $`\mathrm{ord}:T^{\mathrm{}}`$ by

$$T𝔾_m^{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{ord}^{\mathrm{}}}^{\mathrm{}}.$$

Let $`\psi (m,k_1,k_2,X)`$ be the formula in Pas’s language given by

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& t.XE\mathrm{Ad}(k_1tk_2)XD\hfill & \\ & \mathrm{ord}_v(t)=m\hfill & \\ & k_1,k_2𝔤(O).\hfill & \end{array}$$

Being in Pas’s language, the formula is independent of the model $`(L,v)`$. Let $`\psi (m)`$ be the formula

$$k_1k_2X.\psi (m,k_1,k_2,X).$$

The formula $`\psi (m)`$ has a bounded number of solutions in each model $`\theta _v`$. By Theorem 2, there is a finite set $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ that contains the solutions in $`m`$ for almost all models $`L_v`$. This implies that we can pick a finite collection of double cosets that works simultaneously for almost all models $`L_v`$. By the Cartan decomposition, we may assume that $`m_1m_2\mathrm{}`$ for $`m=(m_1,\mathrm{},m_{\mathrm{}})C`$. Write $`K_m`$ for the double coset

$$K\varphi (\pi ^m)K.$$

By the Cartier-style integration formula 4, the integral of the theorem can be written as

$$\underset{mC}{}[K_m:K]_{E_v\times K\times K}\mathrm{char}(\psi (m,k_1,k_2,X))dk_1dk_2dX.$$

By the main theorem of Denef and Loeser , for each $`m`$ in this finite sum, there is a motive $`M_m`$ such that the trace of Frobenius at $`v`$ computes this volume. In their theorem, the $`p`$-adic volume is to be computed with respect to the Serre-Oesterlé measure on the group

$$G(O_v)\times G(O_v)\times 𝔤(O_v).$$

This measure is invariant under analytic isomorphisms of the set. In particular, it is invariant under the group action of

$$G(O_v)\times G(O_v)\times 𝔤(O_v)$$

on itself. Hence it is a Haar measure.

To work out the normalization of the Haar measure, we note that the Serrre-Oesterlé measure coincides with the counting measure modulo a uniformizer, scaled by $`q^{\mathrm{dim}(X)}`$. Thus, the volume of this group is

$$[G]_q\times [G]_q.$$

For the normalization of $`dk`$ and $`dX`$ chosen in Section 4, the measure is also $`[G]_q\times [G]_q`$. Hence the Serre-Oesterlé measure coincides with the chosen Haar measure on this group.

The constant $`[K_m:K]`$, the number of cosets, is a polynomial in $`q`$ with rational coefficients by MacDonald’s formula \[10, sec. 3.2\]. This can be converted to a motive by replacing $`q`$ with $`𝕃`$.

By summing over the finite set of $`mC`$, we obtain the result. ∎

## 6. Effective Calculations

###### Theorem 8.

The virtual Chow motive $`M(f,E)`$ is effectively computable from the data $`f`$ and $`E`$.

###### Remark 9.

More precisely, we compute the virtual Chow motive as an explicit linear combination of classes $`[h(X)]`$, where each $`X`$ is a smooth projective scheme over $``$, $`h(X)`$ is the virtual Chow motive associated with $`X`$, and $`[h(X)]`$ is its class in $`K_0^v(\mathrm{Mot}_{,\overline{}})_{\mathrm{loc},}`$. See \[3, sec. 1.3\]. Each scheme $`X`$ is presented through a finite number of coordinate patches. Each patch is given by an explicit list of polynomials $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_k`$ in $`n`$ variables such that the affine patch is isomorphic to $`[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]/(f_1,\mathrm{},f_k)`$. The maps between coordinate patches are given by explicit polynomials.

###### Proof.

It is enough to prove the result when $`f`$ is the characteristic function of a stable virtual set $`D`$ in $`𝔤`$.

Pas’s algorithm is an effective procedure . In fact, although Pas assumes for simplicity that the residue field has characteristic zero, the finite set of prime characteristics that must be avoided (for a given formula in the language) can be effectively calculated from his algorithm.

The Presburger algorithm is an effective procedure .

Combining Pas’s algorithm and the Presburger algorithm, we have an effective procedure for determining effective bounds on the solutions of each $`L_i`$ of Formula 1, for each $`iB`$. Thus, the set $`C`$ is effectively computable. This means that an effective bound can be obtained on the number of double cosets that must be considered.

###### Lemma 10.

For each $`m`$, the set

$$\{(k_1,k_2,X):\psi (m,k_1,k_2,X)\}$$

is a stable virtual subset of $`G(O)\times G(O)\times 𝔤(O)`$. The level of stability is effectively computable.

###### Proof.

Fix $`m`$. For each model $`L_v`$, it follows directly from compactness of $`E_v`$, $`K_m`$, and the stability of $`D_v`$ and $`E_v`$ that the corresponding $`p`$-adic set is a stable subset of $`G(O_v)\times G(O_v)\times 𝔤(O_v)`$. (This is an expression of the well-known fact that orbital integrals are locally constant on the set of regular semisimple elements.)

Extend $`\mathrm{ord}`$ to a function symbol on matrices $`X=(x_{ij})`$ by defining

$$\mathrm{ord}(X)=\underset{ij}{\mathrm{min}}\mathrm{ord}(x_{ij})$$

Let $`\theta (n)=\theta _m(n)`$ be the formula in Pas’s language given by

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& k_1k_2k_1^{}k_2^{}XX^{}.\hfill & \\ & (\psi (m,k_1,k_2,X)\hfill & \\ & \mathrm{ord}(k_1k_1^{})n\mathrm{ord}(k_2k_2^{})n\mathrm{ord}(XX^{})n)\hfill & \\ & \psi (m,k_1^{},k_2^{},X^{}).\hfill & \end{array}$$

The formula asserts the stability $`\psi `$ at level $`n`$. Let $`\theta ^{}(n)`$ be the formula in Pas’s language given by

$$\theta (n)(n^{}<n.\neg \theta (n^{})).$$

It asserts that $`n`$ is the least level for which it is stable. By the stability of each model $`L_v`$ and Theorem 2, we find that there is a level $`n`$ at which almost all models are stable. This level is effective for the same reasons that the set $`C`$ above is. ∎

Now we continue with the proof that $`M(f,E)`$ is effectively computable. By quantifier elimination, for each $`m`$, the formula $`\psi (m,k_1,k_2,X)`$ can be replaced by an explicit special formula (in the sense of \[3, sec. 5.3\]). Let $`n`$ be the level of stability. Truncation $`\tau _n(\psi )`$ at level $`n`$ gives a formula in $`_n(G\times G\times 𝔤)`$ (the truncated arc-space of \[3, sec. 5.4\]), or equivalently the formula

$$\psi ^{}=\tau _n(\psi )(xG\times G\times 𝔤).$$

This formula may be considered as a formula in the first-order theory of rings. (More explicitly, we work in the model $`[[t]]`$. We replace quantification of $`k_1`$, $`k_2`$, $`X`$ with quantifiers over the matrix coefficients, and each matrix coefficient is expanded as a truncated power series $`x_{ij}=z_0+z_1t+z_2t^2+\mathrm{}.`$)

By the definitions in , we have

$$M(f,E)=\chi _c(\psi ^{})𝕃^{(n+1)d},$$

where $`d`$ is the dimension of $`G\times G\times 𝔤`$.

To conclude the proof, we check that $`\chi _c`$ can be made effective for presented formulas $`\psi ^{}`$ in the first order theory of rings. The procedure is as follows. We write $`\psi ^{}`$ in prenex normal form to get a Galois formula as in \[3, sec. 2.2\]. Quantifier elimination transforms the Galois formula into a Galois stratification. This procedure is effective \[6, ch. 26\]. (See also .) The Galois group is presented as an explicit subgroup of a symmetric group. Part of the data obtained from the Galois stratification is a central function on the Galois group.

By \[6, 26.12\], Artin induction is effective, giving the central function as an explicit rational combination of characters induced from the trivial character on cyclic subgroups. (Fried and Jardin state the lemma for $``$-valued characters, but in our case the characters are take values in a cyclotomic extension of $``$. The degree of the cyclotomic extension is effectively computable from the degree of the Galois cover. We can then extend the Fried-Jardin result by picking an explicit $``$-basis for the cyclotomic extension.)

By refining the Galois stratification as necessary, we may assume that the Galois stratification is affine, that is each $`C/A`$ is a ring cover in the sense of . Artin induction and the properties of $`\chi _c`$ established in  reduce the problem to computing $`\chi _c(X/H)`$, where $`X`$ is affine with a cyclic group action $`H`$, and the data $`(X,H)`$ are explicitly given. The calculation of the quotient amounts to computing the invariants of $`[X]`$ under the finite group $`H`$. There are several implementations of algorithms to compute this ring of invariants. (A survey of implementations appears for example in \[4, page 2\].)

To compute the class $`\chi _c(X)`$ where $`X`$ is an affine variety, embed it in a smooth projective variety $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$. By constructive resolution of singularity algorithms , $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ can be effectively computed from $`X`$. By the properties of the map $`\chi _c`$,

$$\chi _c(X)=[h(\stackrel{~}{X})]\chi _c(D),$$

where $`[h()]`$ is as in Remark 9. The divisor $`D`$ has lower dimension. Part of the constructive resolution of singularities gives a description of the irreducible components of $`D`$. By induction on dimension, we may assume that $`\chi _c(D)`$ is known.

This completes the proof that $`M(f,E)`$ can be effectively computed. ∎