format: text

text:
# On the peak radio and X-ray emission from neutron star and black hole candidate X-ray transients

## 1 Introduction

Radio emission from X-ray binaries is generally believed to originate in incoherent synchrotron emission from a large volume of electrons (and maybe also positrons) spiralling around magnetic field lines and being ejected with large bulk velocities from the binary system. When resolved, these ejecta are often observed to be composed of apparently discrete clumps moving along well collimated (opening angle $`20^{}`$) trajectories at highly relativistic ($`v/c`$ probably $`0.9`$ in at least four cases). For recent reviews see Hjellming & Han (1995), Mirabel & Rodriguez (1999) and Fender (2000a,b).

The strongest radio emission observed from X-ray binaries is that associated with major flares, commonly observed during X-ray outbursts of transient sources (Hjellming & Han 1995; Kuulkers et al. 1999). These transient systems are believed to undergo such outbursts due to disc instabilities, and may contain neutron stars (Campana et al. 1998) or black holes (Tanaka & Lewin 1995; Tanaka & Shibazaki 1996; Charles 1998).

Increasingly, strong connections between the accretion process (observed in X-rays), and the jet/ejection process (observed at radio wavelengths) are becoming apparent. In the persistent neutron star Z sources a relation between position on the ‘Z’ (representing the X-ray colours) and radio emission has been established (Penninx et al. 1988; Hjellming & Han 1995 and references therein). In the persistent black hole candidates Cyg X-1 and GX 339-4 a very clear correlation between radio and soft X-ray emission has been established when the sources are in the Low/Hard X-ray state (Brocksopp et al. 1999 and references therein, Corbel et al. 2000 and references therein), switching to an anticorrelation in the High/Soft X-ray state (Fender et al. 1999b). In addition, the brightest persistent black hole and neutron star X-ray binaries have been found to have an approximately common radio luminosity (Fender & Hendry 2000).

In Fig 1 we summarise our understanding of the relation of radio emission to transient BHC systems. From quiescence (phase 1 in Fig 1), in which systems generally spend 99% of their time, they are observed to evolve rapidly within a day or so to a much brighter state, presumably indicative of an increased accretion rate (e.g. Chen et al. 1997). Subsequently the systems remain bright and only slowly fade away, often taking months to return to their pre-outburst levels. The X-ray spectrum in this stage is generally either disc- or power-law dominated, corresponding to the canonical high/soft or low/hard X-ray states respectively. These two states have dramatically different radio properties (Fender 2000a,c; Fender et al. 1999b) from which we infer differing accretion/outflow couplings, as indicated by phases 3a and 3b in Fig 1 respectively. However this is not directly relevant to this study; here we focus on the discrete ejection events which appear to be associated with the transition phase (stage 2 in Fig 1) at the start of the outburst. For the NS systems, which are all (probably) essentially similar (ie. low magnetic field ‘atoll’ sources) there is no clear distinction in post-peak X-ray behaviour, and as with the BHCs the optically thin radio emission observed during transient outbursts is probably associated with the rapid ejection of matter during the rise to peak of the outburst (stage 2 in Fig 1).

Whilst in the early years of X-ray astronomy few radio counterparts to transient systems were reported, in the past decade many more such systems have been found, in part due to a greater awareness of the ubiquity and significance of the radio emission. In this paper we gather together all the data for BHC and NS transients for which there are reported X-ray and radio observations, with the aim of establishing whether there is a clear relation between X-ray and radio emission from neutron star and black hole candidate X-ray transients both within each class and across the classes.

## 2 The data

Table 1 lists the available information for the 22 X-ray transients for which we have some information on the peak X-ray and radio flux, subdivided into 6 neutron-star systems (NSs) and 16 black-hole candidates (BHCs). In addition we tabulate the same information for the two recently discovered ‘fast transients’ (FTs), XTE J0421+560/CI Cam and SAX J1819.3-2525/V4641 Sgr (the latter of which is likely to be a BHC – Orosz et al. 2000a, b), and several unusual sources of recurrent X-ray and radio outbursts, namely Cyg X-3, GRS 1915+105 and Cir X-1. As well as information on the source name, outburst date, peak X-ray and radio fluxes and references, we indicate whether the radio emission from the source has been directly resolved by radio interferometry. This reveals that none of the 7 NS transient events, three (maybe four) of the 16 BHC events, and all of the FTs and unusual recurrent systems have been directly resolved into jets. The data sets for the NS and BHC plus FT systems are plotted separately in Figs 2(a) and 1(b) respectively.

We briefly discuss below how the peak X-ray and radio fluxes presented in Table 1 were estimated and compiled.

### 2.1 Radio

Radio data are based on peak observed flux density at a frequency of 5 GHz. Where measurements at 5 GHz are not available, we assume a spectral index of $`\alpha =\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{log}S_\nu /\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{log}\nu =0.5`$ in order to estimate the flux density at 5 GHz based on other observations. While most transient outbursts are accompanied by optically thin events for which this will be a good approximation, some systems produce flat or inverted (in the sense that $`\alpha 0`$) radio spectra, which are generally associated with low/hard X-ray states (Fender 2000c). However, in nearly all cases there is an initial optically thin event before the radio emission inverts and becomes dominated by the flat-spectrum component, and so a comparison with transients which achieve the high/soft state is probably warranted (see Fig 1; an exception may be XTE J1118+480 which does not appear at any stage to have shown an optically thin radio spectrum – G. G. Pooley & R. M. Hjellming, private communication).

In nearly all cases radio coverage is far less complete than X-ray coverage, and so we may often miss the peak. In particular, in nearly all cases the outburst is observed first in X-rays and then followed-up at radio and other wavelengths. However, since there is no obvious way of compensating for what is essentially an unknown effect, we can only assume that this affects all sources in a more or less similar way. In an attempt to compensate for this, we somewhat arbitrarily add a 20% uncertainty to all our radio measurements when representing them in the figures or statistical tests.

### 2.2 X-ray

Most X-ray transients are discovered by all-sky monitors early on during the rise of the outburst, so that their peaks are well covered. Such all-sky monitors operate nominally in the 1-10 keV energy range, although the range covered is not always the same (see Chen et al. 1997). The most notable exceptions are those transients which were observed during 1992-1995; at that time the only all-sky monitors were CGRO/BATSE (20-300 keV) and WATCH/GRANAT (8-20 keV; only active in 1992–1993). Fortunately this applies in our case only to GRO J0422+32, the 1994 and 1995 outbursts of GRO J1655-40, and GRS 1716-249. About three quarters of the transients have been discovered or monitored in the last 5 years, during which the RXTE/ASM was active.

Since spectral data are not always available in the literature, we decided to convert the X-ray intensities to units of the Crab count rate in the same energy band. Note that in this case we do not take into account interstellar extinction, which may alter the intrinsic source strength. Such changes are most severe in the Galactic center region. However, we estimate that this changes the peak X-ray fluxes only by a factor between $``$2–5, depending on the exact spectral shape at the time of the peak and the interstellar absorption column.

In order to take into account the energy range covered by the instrument in question and the effect of interstellar extinction we, again somewhat arbitrarily, assume an error in the peak flux of 10% for use in figures and statistical tests.

A note is warranted regarding 1A 1742-289, whoses NS credentials are not 100% certain. Lewin et al. (1976) derived source positions for three burst sources in the Galactic centre region. For one of them, MXB 1743-29, two equally likely positions separated by $`0.3`$ degrees were found. It was noted that A1742-289 lies within the (overlapping) error circles, and that possibly A1742-289 is the burst source MXB 1743-29. Subsequently there was the detection of a bursting and eclipsing X-ray source by ASCA consistent with the position of 1A 1742-289 (Maeda et al. 1996). However, Kennea & Skinner (1996) found that the source found by ASCA cannot be the quiescent counterpart of 1A 1742-289, based on the absence of eclipses during the outburst in 1975. Since 1A 1742-289 lies just next to the Galactic Center the chances are significant that they are indeed not the same source and therefore the nature of the compact object in 1A 1742-289 remains an open question. This is a salient point as, Cir X-1 aside, this is the brightest radio source associated with a neutron-star X-ray binary.

### 2.3 Physical meaning of the peak fluxes

In comparing the X-ray and radio peak fluxes, what are we physically investigating ? In X-rays, the peak flux is generally supposed to represent the instantaneous dissipation rate of accretion energy, and as such is proportional to the (disc) mass inflow rate, i.e. P$`{}_{X}{}^{}\dot{m}_{\mathrm{disc}}`$. The radio emission however is produced by a plasma in which dissipation of internal energy is not instant, and additionally may have significant self-absorption optical depth, and so P$`{}_{R}{}^{}\dot{m}_{\mathrm{jet}}t_{\mathrm{inj}}e^\tau `$ where $`\dot{m}_{\mathrm{jet}}`$ is the (mean) rate of injection of relativistic electrons into the jet, $`t_{\mathrm{inj}}`$ is the duration of this injection period, and $`\tau `$ is the optical depth to self-absorption. Typically $`\tau _{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}1`$ by the peak or declining phases of the radio events (see e.g. Hjellming & Han 1995), and so we do not consider the $`e^\tau `$ term to be significant at the level of accuracy of this paper.

## 3 Correlations

The two data sets presented in Table 1 and Fig 2 allow us to ask two important questions, namely (a) are peak X-ray flux and peak radio flux density correlated ?, and (b) is the relation between X-ray and radio fluxes the same for the BHC and NS samples ?

### 3.1 Are PR and PX correlated ?

We have tested the NS and BHC data sets individually using a Spearman-Rank correlation test, and additionally for the entire (NS+BHC+FT) data sets. The Spearman-Rank correlation coefficient for each of the three samples, plus its significance, are presented in table 2. Both the BHCs as an individual sample, and the entire (NS+BHC+FT) sample show a statistically significant (nonparametric) correlation at greater than the 95% confidence level. While for the NS sample the significance is only marginal (especially if 1A 1742-289 is excluded), this is may be due to the small sample size. Therefore we can conclude that the magnitude of X-ray and radio outbursts from X-ray transients are probably correlated. As caveats to this, we note that this is still small number statistics (particularly in the case of the NS systems), and that we do not attempt to include the upper limits to the radio fluxes reported for the 1998 Jan outburst of the Rapid Burster, the 1995 Aug outburst of GRO J1655-40 and for XTE J1755-324.

### 3.2 Black holes vs. Neutron stars

We can quantitatively compare the NS and BHC data sets presented in Table 1 and Fig 2 to see if we can discern any underlying differences in the relation between X-ray and radio fluxes, and therefore ultimately accretion and ejection, between the two types of compact object. Firstly, we can apply a 2D Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test to the two data sets to see if they are drawn from the same distribution in PR vs. PX. The test reveals it is highly likely that the two distributions are different (at a $`97`$% confidence level). However, this may simply reflect the fact that the NS sample is from the lower end of the distribution. In Fig 3 we plot, for both NS and BHC samples, ‘radio loudness’ (PR/PX) as a function of peak soft X-ray luminosity. Again a 2D K-S test reveals the two samples, represented in this way, to be significantly different (at $`>98`$% confidence). Inspection of this Figure suggests that the discrepancy is the distribution in (PR/PX), not in PX. In Fig 4 we plot the distribution of (PR/PX), in order of magnitude bins, for the NS and BHC samples, reinforcing this impression. In addition in Fig 4 we indicate the mean values of (PR/PX) for the six persistent neutron star (specifically, Z-sources on the ‘Horizontal branch’) and four persistent black hole candidate (specifically, in the ‘Low/Hard’ X-ray state) binaries based on the radio data in Fender & Hendry (2000) and public RXTE ASM data. A 1D K-S test confirms that the distributions in (PR/PX) are significantly different ($`>98`$% confidence) and, interestingly, shows that the distribution of PX is not significantly different for the two samples ($`<35`$% probability of null hypothesis).

Excluding upper limits, we find that for the NS sample, the mean value ($`\pm `$ standard error) of PR/P$`{}_{X}{}^{}=160\pm 160`$. Excluding the potentially anomalous and least reliable source, ie. 1A 1742-289 (see section 2.2), reduces this substantially to $`2.6\pm 1.5`$. For the BHCs, we find PR/P$`{}_{X}{}^{}=230\pm 150`$ excluding the FTs, and PR/P$`{}_{X}{}^{}=230\pm 130`$ including them. Thus this measure is consistent with BHC transients being more ‘radio-loud’ than NS transients, by a factor of between 1.5 – 100.

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 Coupled inflow and outflow in transient events

As discussed in section 3.1, PR and PX are significantly positively correlated for the BHC X-ray transients (and marginally so for the small NS sample). Based on section 2.3, this implies that there is a correlation between $`\dot{m}_{\mathrm{disc}}`$ and $`\dot{m}_{\mathrm{jet}}t_{\mathrm{inj}}e^\tau `$. Since we argue in 2.3 that $`\tau 1`$ at the peak of the radio emission, we do not consider the $`e^\tau `$ term significant for the order-of-magnitude arguments being presented here. Therefore we can state that $`\dot{m}_{\mathrm{disc}}`$ is correlated with $`\dot{m}_{\mathrm{jet}}t_{\mathrm{inj}}`$. We stress that the correlation does not imply a simple linear relation, which is not a good fit to either NS or BHC data sets. There is at least one physical reason underlying this, namely that the radio emission, unlike the X-rays, is expected to be beamed. If we could assume that $`t_{\mathrm{inj}}`$ is likely to be related to the X-ray rise time of the outburst, and further that $`t_{\mathrm{inj}}`$ is likely to be similar for all the systems, then we could state confidently that $`\dot{m}_{\mathrm{disc}}`$ is correlated with $`\dot{m}_{\mathrm{jet}}`$. However, Chen et al. (1997) find a fairly broad distribution of rise times, generally of order one day, whose relation to the radio outbursts we will not investigate here. Nevertheless, this is further evidence, not unexpectedly, that there is a clear coupling between inflow and outflow around accreting compact objects.

### 4.2 A higher radio:X-ray ratio for BHCs ?

We have shown in section 3.2 that the BHC systems have, in general, a higher ratio of PR/PX. This result is consistent with the common radio luminosity found for NS Z sources on the radio-bright horizontal branch of the X-ray colour-colour diagram, and persistent BHCs in the jet-producing Low/Hard X-ray state (Fender & Hendry 2000), because the Z sources are generally around an order of magnitude brighter in X-rays than the BHCs in the Low/Hard state. Quantitatively, based on the mean radio flux densities presented in Fender & Hendry (2000) and public RXTE ASM data, SR/S$`{}_{X}{}^{}30`$ for the persistent BHCs and SR/S$`{}_{X}{}^{}1`$ for the persistent neutron stars (where SR and SX represent steady fluxes for these systems); these values are indicated by arrows in Fig 4. A word of caution: while it is reasonable to note qualitatively the greater ‘radio loudness’ of BHC systems in both tran sient and persistent sources, a quantitative comparison of PR/PX for the transients with SR/SX for the persistent sources is not justified, as in the latter case there is likely to be significant and continuous self-absorption at radio wavelengths (ie. $`\tau _{5\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}>1`$; Fender 2000c).

What is the underlying cause of this effect ? One possibility is that for some reason black holes are more efficient at producing radio emission per unit mass of accreted matter. Perhaps this is simply because the deeper potential well of the black hole allows more energy to be extracted, which beyond a certain X-ray flux is channelled into the outflow, or maybe the black hole spin energy can be extracted via the Blandford & Znajek (1977) process. Another possibility is that both classes of systems produce similar outflows at similar rates, but that extra photons from the neutron star surface produce additional cooling of the putative synchrotron-emitting electrons. Finally, and perhaps most likely, it may be not that black holes are ‘radio-loud’, but rather that they are ‘X-ray quiet’, again related to the presence of the event horizon rather than a surface. In this case we might imagine the accretion flow would produce a jet at some radius which was not affected by the nature of the accretor, but the flow was radiatively inefficient and advected a large fraction of its energy across the black hole event horizon (see e.g. Narayan, Mahadevan & Quataert 1998). It is interesting to note that in section 3.2 we found that the distribution of PX was not significantly different for the NS and BHC samples; this would appear to support an ‘X-ray quiet’ rather than a ‘radio loud’ description of the BHC sample, presuming that the BHCs are on average more massive than the NS systems. Further comparisons of the distribution of PX for NS and BHCs, for all transient events, would be very interesting (but would also require more careful consideration of e.g. absorption and other selection effects).

It is interesting in this context to note the recent debate about the relative luminosities of BHC and NS systems in quiescence, and their ratio of outburst to quiescent X-ray flux (e.g. Asai et al. 1998; Menou et al. 1999; Campana & Stella 2000). While still controversial, it has been suggested that the combination of advective flow and event horizon results in a lower X-ray luminosity for quiescent BHCs compared to quiescent NS systems. The results here, while requiring further careful interpretation, may be further evidence for broad observational differences between BHC and NS systems resulting from the presence or not of a solid surface.

### 4.3 Comparison with recurrent relativistic jet sources

In Fig 5 we plot ‘radio loudness’ as a function of PX for all the systems in Table 1, including the range of peak fluxes displayed in the repeated outbursts of Cyg X-3, GRS 1915+105 and Cir X-1 (based somewhat subjectively on inspection of extended X-ray and radio data sets). In addition we indicate the direction of a shift to higher peak radio flux densities at smaller inclinations, if the radio emission is significantly Doppler boosted.

Several things are noteworthy upon careful inspection of the figure:

* The FTs are consistent with the distribution, in particular with the brightest of the BHCs
* The repeated ($`>100`$; e.g. Pooley & Fender 1997) X-ray/radio outbursts of GRS 1915+105, frequently resolved into relativistic ejections (Mirabel & Rodriguez 1994; Fender et al. 1999a), sit right in the middle of distribution of black hole outbursts
* Cyg X-3 has a considerably higher radio:X-ray ratio than any of the other outbursting or transient systems

We briefly discuss these points below :

#### 4.3.1 Fast transients

The position of the FTs in Figs 2 and 3 reveals that their radio and X-ray peak fluxes are entirely consistent with bright outbursts of BHC systems. This is consistent with the results of Orosz et al. (2000a,b) who claim that the FT V4641 Sgr is likely to contain a black hole (see also the suggestion in Belloni et al. 1999 that the FT CI Cam may contain a black hole). However, given the small samples and strange behaviour in the past of the e.g. NS Cir X-1, this cannot be considered as more than circumstantial support for this interpretation.

#### 4.3.2 Cyg X-3

Cyg X-3 has the largest radio:X-ray ratio of any X-ray binary; in fact with multiple radio outbursts brighter than 10 Jy (e.g. Waltman et al. 1995), it is the brightest radio source ever associated with an X-ray binary. Furthermore, it was one of the earliest sources in which a clear correlation between X-ray and radio outbursts was established (Watanabe et al. 1994; see also McCollough et al. 1999). Why is it so bright ? Recent VLBA observations reveal a milliarcsecond-scale jet which is clearly one-sided (Mioduszewski et al. 1998, 2001) and may be interpreted as a $`0.8c`$ jet inclined within a few degrees of the line of sight. If so, Cyg X-3 is the galactic equivalent of a blazar and may represent more or less the extreme of the possible radio:X-ray ratios.

#### 4.3.3 GRS 1915+105

As Fig 5 clearly demonstrates, the repeated simultaneous X-ray:radio outbursts of the ‘microquasar’ GRS 1915+105 lie right in the middle of the BHC distribution. This clearly indicates that while the repetition rate and timescales of X-ray and radio behaviour exhibited by GRS 1915+105 may be unique (e.g. Belloni et al. 2000), the peak X-ray and radio fluxes for individual outbursts are entirely ‘normal’ for BHCs in outburst.

## 5 Conclusions

In collecting together data on (near-)simultaneous peak X-ray and radio fluxes from neutron-star (NS), black-hole-candidate (BHC) and a small number of other systems, we have established that there is a significant positive correlation between the two measures for the BHC sample. The NS sample may also be correlated, but the small numbers at present result in only marginal evidence. This is further direct evidence of a coupling between accretion and jet formation in X-ray binaries, and in this case indicates qualitatively that the maximum disc accretion rate is related to the total number of synchroton-emitting electrons ejected. In principle, the accretion and outflow rate could be directly compared using peak X-ray flux (PX) and rate of increase of the radio flux density before the peak of the radio outburst ($`dS_\nu /dt`$), but since in most cases the radio rise is missed, this will not be easy to achieve.

We have also demonstrated that the distribution of PR/PX, or ‘radio loudness’, is significantly different for the NS and BHC distributions, in the sense that the BHC sample is in general more ‘radio loud’. This is confirmed by comparison with the persistent, bright BHC and NS systems. The root of this difference seems likely, as with most observational differences between neutron star and black hole X-ray binaries, to be in the presence of a surface in only the NS sample. An important question is whether the BHC sample is ‘radio loud’ or ‘X-ray quiet’. The latter interpretation, if confirmed, may be considered as further evidence for advective flows crossing an event horizon in black hole systems (but presumably in this case at high accretion rates). This result is particularly interesting in the light of recent claims that luminosity differences between quiescent BHS and NS systems are also tracers of the presence or not of a solid surface (e.g. Asai et al. 1998; Menou et al. 1999; Campana & Stella 2000).

Furthermore, at least three of the BHC sample and both of the FT sample have been resolved into moderately relativistic outflows at radio wavelengths. Their consistency with the rest of the sample implies that the simplest picture is one in which all BHC transients produce a mildly relativistic (bulk Lorentz factor $`1\mathrm{\Gamma }5`$) jet (if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ were very high, it would destroy the correlation and would also result in more systems with no detectable radio emission, as it would be beamed out of the line of sight). The neutron stars probably also produce such outflows, but direct observational measurements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for this sample do not yet exist. An origin for all X-ray transient radio outbursts in outflows is not a new idea – see e.g. Hjellming & Han (1995) – but this is the first quantitative investigation of the concept. Supporting this picture, the range of peak fluxes associated with the multiple X-ray/radio outbursts of the jet source GRS 1915+105, are entirely consistent with the broader distribution of BHC transients. This in turn implies that there is nothing special about the physics of the accretion : outflow coupling in GRS 1915+105. While we have not attempted to constrain the upper bound to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the reader should bear in mind that the higher its (mean) value, the less likely it is that we should find the observed correlation, as a result of beaming (relativistic aberration), unless the X-rays are also beamed. This point is discussed further in Fender & Hendry (2000) for the case of persistent X-ray binaries, where an attempt is made to constrain the maximum value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ using Monte Carlo simulations.

Exceptions to this simplistic model of course exist; the rapid transition from radio-loud to radio-quiet during a sequence of declining X-ray outbursts of GRO J1655-40 (corresponding to a decrease in PR/PX by a factor of 5500!) is hard to explain. Similarly, the decay by orders of magnitude in the strength of radio outbursts from Cir X-1 while its peak X-ray flux has increased by a factor of 2–3 is difficult to understand. It seems probable that more than simply jet precession is required to explain some changes, and that additional factors e.g. thermal absorption will need to be considered before the picture is clear.

## Acknowledgements

This research has made use of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France. We thank G. G. Pooley and the late R. M. Hjellming and for continuous free exchange of information, P. Jonker, J. Homan and R. Wijnands for discussions about our data set, and both the anonymous referee and G. Dubus for critical reading of the manuscript which led to significant improvements to the paper.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Though the “Standard Cosmological Model”  finds its theoretical grounds on a purely classical and maximally symmetric solution of the Einstein equations, like the Friedmann-Lameître-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) model, nevertheless it is commonly believed that quantum effects could have played an important dynamical role during the evolution of the early universe.

Among such quantum effects are surely of key relevance those related to processes of particles creation; indeed, due to the strong time variation singled out by the background gravitational field near the cosmological singularity, it is naturally expected that quantum fluctuations of the field itself, as well as the dynamics of any quantum field living on such a nonstationary background, lead to phenomena of matter creation, whose existence can in turn modifys the early universe behaviour.

A detailed microscopic description of matter creation phenomena should be provided by a (fully self-consistent) quantum field theory on a curved space-time , or, when the backreaction of the created matter becomes no longer negligible (in the sense of strong quantum fluctuations around any average effect), by a pure quantum gravity theory in presence of “matter” fields.

A macroscopic phenomenological description of processes of matter creation, able to make account of the everage effect induced on the (classical) dynamics of an isotropic expanding universe, was proposed by I. Prigogine et al. (see -) which is based on the application, to the universe comoving volume (i. e. spatial volume of unit comoving coordinates), of the standard theory of open thermodynamic systems having a conserved specific entropy (entropy per particle); such a description was then generalized in  by allowing the specific entropy be no longer constant and putting its formulation in a completely covariant form.

If the matter present in the universe is described by the energy-momentum tensor of a perfect fluid, then, in such an approach, the pressure of the fluid, apart from the usual thermostatic component, contains an additional term, directly related to the time variation of the particles number within the comoving volume; furthermore the total entropy within such a comoving volume, of the universe, directly proportional to the particles number, is clearly no longer constant (like in the Standard Cosmological Model), since it increases during the processes of matter creation (with interesting implications about the explanation of the actual universe entropy).

Of course, the above mentioned macroscopic phenomenological approach is not completely self-consistent since it can not clearly determine the correct expression for the rate of particles creation; therefore such an information is an open degree of freedom of the scheme and it should be provided by the formulation of an appropriate ansatz  for the considered dynamical model.

In  the influence of a particles creation term on a FLRW universe, having a flat three-dimensional space, was studied in presence of bulk viscosity, by showing how the assumption of a reasonable ansatz (for the rate of particles creation) leads to the appearance of nonsingular cosmologies in correspondence to some particular choice of the free parameters of the model.

Our analysis generalize the ansatz presented in  to make it even suitable for the description of a spatially negative curved FLRW model and the resulting early dynamics (analysed close to the thermodynamic equilibrium and in absence of bulk viscosity, which, in agreement to what below discussed in section $`2`$ should be appropriately treated in this framework only as a small perturbative term) appears to be, in both the cases, as deeply modified by the processes of matter creation. Indeed in the case of a flat FLRW universe we get a nonsingular cosmology in correspondence to an open set of the allowed parameters.

More precisely, by choosing an appropriate time variable (the logaritm of the comoving volume), we reduce the dynamical problem to an evolutive equation for the only energy density filling the universe, whose analytical solution provides a functional form of the time variable which is bounded or unbounded depending on the sign of the integration constant. In the physical case of a strictly positive integration constant, in correspondence to any choice of the allowed parameters, the evolution of the universe asymptotically approaches for sufficiently late times the FLRW one, while its early stages are characterized, respectively in the flat and negative curved cases, by an “eternal” inflationary-like behaviour and a spatial curvature dominated singularity.

The most important aim of this paper is to show how, at least in the adopted phenomenological framework, the matter creation could have been deeply influenced the very early phases of the universe life, up to the point of providing an explanation for some fundamental puzzles of the modern cosmology, like the cosmological singularity and the horizon problem.

It is important to observe how, though the precise nature of the phenomena of particles creation relays on the detailed microphysics working in the early universe, nevertheless the notion of heat Big-Bang (indeed we will get below the universe has a maximal initial temperature to be reasonably fitted by a value $`10^{19}GeV`$) implies that the most part of the created particles should be initially photons.

In section $`2`$ is given a brief review of the theory of open thermodynamic systems, whose application to the universe evolution provides the theoretical framework for the dynamical analysis developed in section $`3`$; finally concluding remarks follows in section $`4`$.

## 2 Theory of the Open Thermodynamic Systems

Here we provide a description of the theory of open thermodynamic systems and its application to the universe thermodynamics, which leads to the natural phenomenological description of matter creation processes adopted in the analysis of section $`3`$ - (see also ).

Let us consider a thermodynamical fluid whose energy density, thermostatic pressure, volume, temperature, entropy and particles number are denoted respectively by $`\rho `$, $`p`$, $`V`$, $`T`$, $`S`$ and $`N`$. All these thermodynamical parameters should satisfy the Gibbs relation:

$$d(\rho V)=TdSpdV+\mu dN$$
(1)
where $`\mu `$ denotes the chemical potential (i. e. the Gibbs function per particle) and is defined as:

$$\mu =\frac{(\rho +p)V}{N}\frac{TS}{N}$$
(2)
By the above definition of the chemical potential it is easy to rewrite the relation (1) in the form:

$$d(\rho V)=NTd\sigma pdV+\frac{H}{N}dN$$
(3)
where $`\sigma `$ and $`H`$ denote respectively the specific entropy ($`\sigma =S/N`$) and the total enthalpy ($`H=(\rho +p)V`$).

Now, by the first law of thermodynamics, we get the fundamental relation (total energy conservation):

$$d(\rho V)=\delta QPdV$$
(4)
where $`\delta Q`$ indicates the heat exchanged and $`P`$ the total thermodynamical pressure.

By the comparison of the two equations (3) and (4) take place the following natural identifications:

$$\delta Q=NTd\sigma P=p+\mathrm{\Pi }$$
(5)
where $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ denotes an additional pressure term due to the matter creation:

$$\mathrm{\Pi }=\frac{H}{N}\frac{dN}{dV}=(\rho +p)\frac{dlnN}{dlnV}$$
(6)
When applying this theory to the case of an expanding isotropic universe we should require that all the thermodynamic functions depend only on time and the volume $`V`$ be the comoving volume corresponding (by convention) to an unit coordinate volume.

Finally, by requiring that the universe be an adiabatic system, we get the following fundamental relation:

$$\delta Q=0NTd\sigma =0$$
(7)
Now, if we treate the universe as a closed system having a fixed number of particles per comoving volume ($`N=const.`$), then the above adiabatic condition (7 leads to the entropy conservation $`dS=0`$ (like in the Standard Cosmological Model); instead when the universe behaves as an open thermodynamic system and it is allowed the particles number per comoving volume changes during its evolution, the same adiabatic relation provides the following fundamental expression for the entropy variation:

$$TdS=\frac{TS}{N}dN$$
(8)
To put the above thermodynamical scheme in a covariant form (appropriate to our purposes), it is enough to redefine the energy-momentum tensor of a perfect fluid as:

$$T_{ik}=(\rho +P)u_iu_k+Pg_{ik}i,k=0,1,2,3$$
(9)
where $`u_i`$ and $`g_{ik}`$ denote respectively the four-velocity of the fluid and the space-time metric.

To conclude, it is important to abserve that, since for $`dlnN/dlnV>(\rho +3p)/(3\rho +3p)`$ we have $`\rho +3P<0`$, then, in agreement to , the particles creation term can provide a sufficiently negative pressure to remove the cosmological singularity.

Let us now face the question concerning the possibility of including in the above scheme viscosity effects.

Indeed it is commonly believed that phenomena of matter creation should be associated with the presence of a certain degree of bulk viscosity, as assumed in ; however, as discussed in , when referred to rapidly space-time varying phenomena (like the ones concerning the very early cosmology) the standard theory of viscosity should be amended for accounting of the finite velocity by which any thermodynamical effect propagates.

Such an aim can be reached, in a phenomenological approach, by introducing suitable relaxation times (typically of the order of the mean collision time) which make account for the characteristic time of the system evolution. When such characteristic time is sufficiently large, then the standard theory of viscous fluids can provide a satisfactory description of the considered thermodynamic system; but if such time becomes short enough, the system resembles more a viscoelastic solid and the causal effects should be taken into account.

More precisely, when referred to the only presence of bulk viscosity, the theory of viscoelastic matter, derived in , can be (dynamically) summarized by the following energy-momentum tensor:

$$T_{ik}=(\rho +P+\omega )u_iu_k+(P+\omega )g_{ik}i,k=0,1,2,3$$
(10)
where $`\omega `$ denotes the dilatational-stress coefficient and satisfys the equation:

$$\omega +\tau _0\dot{\omega }=\xi u_{;i}^i\dot{()}()_{;i}u^i$$
(11)
with ; indicating the covariant derivative and $`\tau _0`$ and $`\xi `$ respectively the relaxation time and the dilatation coefficent; in the limit $`\tau _0\mathrm{}`$ the ratio $`\xi /\tau _0`$ goes over the bulk modulus.

Since such a theory is only appropriate to describe quasi-stationary systems, which evolve close to the thermodynamical equilibrium, then $`\omega `$ should fulfills the inequality :

$$\omega ^2\frac{\tau _0}{\xi }\rho $$
(12)
Now the first law of the thermodynamics (which is provided by the conservation law for the energy-momentum tensor (10) and in the below analysis plays a key dynamical role) reads:

$$d\rho =(\rho +P+\omega )dlnV$$
(13)
Since $`\omega `$, $`\tau _0`$ and $`\xi `$ are expected to be function of the only energy density $`\rho `$ (below, by choosing a suitable ansatz for the particles creation term, we get that even $`P`$ is a function of $`\rho `$), then a good (dimensional) assumption about the form the ratio $`\xi /\tau _0`$ should take, is given by 111In  it was assumed with satisfactory causal results the form $`\xi /\tau _0\rho `$.:

$$\frac{\xi }{\tau _0}=\rho \left(\frac{\rho }{\rho ^{}}\right)^k\rho ^{}=const.>0k=const.0$$
(14)
Hence equation (12) rewrites:

$$\omega \rho \left(\frac{\rho }{\rho ^{}}\right)^{\frac{k}{2}}$$
(15)
By the dynamical analysis developed in the next section we will show that, in the case of physical interest, during the all universe evolution, the energy density satisfys the restriction $`\rho \overline{\rho }\overline{\rho }=const.>0`$.

Now in the cases $`\overline{\rho }\rho ^{}`$ and $`\overline{\rho }\rho ^{}`$, by (15), we see that in equation (13) the contribution due to $`\omega `$ is to be regarded as a small perturbation. Instead in the case $`\overline{\rho }\rho ^{}`$, the above claim is no longer always true. However the former cases appear preferrable from a physical point of view, since, in the limit of very small values of the viscosity coefficient $`\xi `$, we can yet speak of a real (weakly) viscous fluid (i. e. are yet allowed large values of the relaxation time $`\tau _0`$). But the most important physical reason which leads us to believe the viscosity effects be negligible in the earliest phases of the universe evolution relays on the observation presented at the end of section $`1`$ about the requirement of an early dominant radiation component; indeed termalized photons are not expected to resemble a viscous fluid, like instead could take place for a later hadronic component.

According to the above general statement, in our approach we will neglect the viscosity effects which, providing only a small dynamical perturbation, can not drastically modify the results below obtained 222However, on this level, we can not exclude at all that, under certain conditions, the viscosity effects could play a relevant dynamical role during the very early stages of the universe evolution..

## 3 Dynamical Model

As well known, in a synchronous reference, the geometrical structure of the FLRW universe is summarized by a line element of the form :

$$ds^2=c^2dt^2+R^2(t)dl^2$$
(16)
where $`c`$ denotes the speed of the light, $`R(t)`$ ($`t_it\mathrm{}t_i\mathrm{}`$) the cosmic scale factor (which has the dimension of a lenght) and $`dl^2`$ the line element of a constant curvature three-dimensional space, i.e.:

$$dl^2=\frac{dr^2}{1kr^2}+r^2(d\theta ^2+sin^2\theta d\varphi ^2)$$
(17)
Here by $`k`$ we indicate the curvature signature ($`k=1,0,+1`$).

The evolution of the FLRW universe is governed by the following two Friedmann and “continuity” equations:

$$H(t)^2\left(\frac{1}{R}\frac{dR}{dt}\right)^2=\frac{c^2\chi }{3}\rho \frac{c^2k}{R^2}$$
(18)
$$d(\rho R^3)=Pd(R^3)$$
(19)
Above $`\chi =8\pi G/c^4`$ (being $`G`$ the Newton constant).

Now we introduce the new time variable $`\eta (t)`$, defined by:

$$d\eta =3H(t)dtR(\eta )=R_0e^{\frac{1}{3}(\eta \eta _0)}\mathrm{}<\eta <\mathrm{}$$
(20)
where $`R_0`$ and $`\eta _0`$ denote two assigned constants ($`R_0>0`$). By other words we adopt as time variable, the logaritm of the comoving volume to describe the universe expansion (the above position $`d\eta =3H(t)dt`$ clearly provides an appropriate time variable only in the case of an expanding universe, i. e. $`H>0`$).

In terms of (20) the line element (16) reads:

$$ds^2=\frac{c^2d\eta ^2}{9H^2(\eta )}+R_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}e^{\frac{2}{3}(\eta \eta _0)}dl^2$$
(21)
Starting by the above line element and in agreement with the thermodynamical scheme presented in the previous section, the dynamical equations for the FLRW model, in presence of particles creation, take the form :

$$H^2(\eta )=\frac{c^2\chi }{3}\rho (\eta )\frac{c^2k}{R_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}e^{\frac{2}{3}(\eta \eta _0)}$$
(22)
$$\frac{d\rho }{d\eta }=(\rho +P)$$
(23)
where $`\rho `$ denotes the energy density associated with the matter filling the universe, and $`P`$ the corresponding total (isotropic) pressure, constituted by the following two contributions:

$$P=p+\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }(\rho +p)\frac{dlnN}{dln(R^3)}=(\rho +p)\frac{dlnN}{d\eta }$$
(24)
Now, to the existence of such dissipative processes is associated an entropy production determined, in agreement with (8), by the relation:

$$T\frac{dS}{d\eta }=\frac{TS}{N}\frac{dN}{d\eta }$$
(25)
Since, according to the second law of the thermodynamics, the entropy never decreases ($`dS0`$), from (25) we immediately get the conditions:

$$dN0dlnN0$$
(26)
In terms of (24) equation (23) can be rewritten as follows:

$$\frac{d\rho }{d\eta }=(\rho +p)\left(\frac{dlnN}{d\eta }1\right)$$
(27)
By introducing the particles density $`n=\frac{N}{R_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}}e^{(\eta \eta _0)}`$ the above equation takes the more compact form:

$$\frac{d\rho }{d\eta }=\frac{\rho +p}{n}\frac{dn}{d\eta }$$
(28)
The above thermodynamical scheme is completed by the following evolutive equation concerning the universe temperature :

$$\frac{1}{T}\frac{dT}{d\eta }=\left(\frac{p}{\rho }\right)_n\frac{1}{n}\frac{dn}{d\eta }$$
(29)
We conclude the formulation of the considered cosmological problem by observing that the relation between the synchronous time and the adopted time variable $`\eta `$ is given by:

$$t(\eta )=t_0+_{\eta _0}^\eta \frac{d\eta ^{}}{3H(\eta ^{})}t_0t(\eta _0)$$
(30)
as well as, in terms of our variables, the physical horizon reads:

$$d_H(\eta )=ce^{\frac{1}{3}\eta }_{\mathrm{}}^\eta \frac{d\eta ^{}}{3e^{\frac{1}{3}\eta ^{}}H(\eta ^{})}$$
(31)
The advantage in using the adopted time variable $`\eta `$ consists of the decoupled character acquired by equation (22) (i. e. since now $`R(\eta )`$ is a known function, then equations (22) amd (27) decouple from each other ), so reducing the considered cosmological problem to solve the only evolutive equation (27).

However to solve the equation (27) it is necessary to assign the equation of state relating the pressure $`p`$ to the energy density $`\rho `$, but overall to make an appropriate ansatz for the particles creation term $`dlnN/d\eta `$.

In what follows we shall assume an equation of state of the form :

$$p=(\gamma 1)\rho 1\gamma 2$$
(32)
where $`\gamma `$ denotes the adiabatic index (in particular $`\gamma `$ takes the values $`4/3`$ for the ultrarelativistic matter and $`1`$ for a dust).

In order to individualize an appropriate ansatz for $`dlnN/d\eta `$, we preliminary observe that, by using (32), then equation (28) immediately gives:

$$\rho =\rho _0\left(\frac{n}{n_0}\right)^\gamma n=n_0\left(\frac{\rho }{\rho _0}\right)^{\frac{1}{\gamma }}$$
(33)
where $`\rho _0`$ and $`n_0`$ denote two positive constants (namely, $`\rho _0=\rho (\eta _0)`$. $`n_0=n(\eta _0)`$).

It is easy to realize that equation (33) leads to the following implications:

$$\rho 0n0\frac{dlnN}{d\eta }=0$$
(34)
$$\rho =const.0n=const.0\frac{dlnN}{d\eta }=1$$
(35)
Since in the case of a FLRW model with negative curvature ($`k=1`$) the condition $`\rho 0`$ is yet compatible with the existence of a real space-time (characterized by $`H=cexp\{(\eta \eta _0)/3\}/R_0`$), we are naturally lead to the following ansatz :

$$\frac{dlnN}{d\eta }=\alpha \left(H^2+\frac{c^2k}{R_0^2}e^{\frac{2}{3}(\eta \eta _0)}\right)^\beta =\left(\frac{\rho }{\overline{\rho }}\right)^\beta $$
(36)
where $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ denote two positive constants and we set:

$$\overline{\rho }\frac{3}{c^2\chi \alpha ^{\frac{1}{\beta }}}$$
(37)
This expression for $`dlnN/d\eta `$ clearly satisfys (34) and, in view of (35), if $`\rho =\rho _c=const.`$, we should have:

$$\rho _c=\overline{\rho }$$
(38)
By using (36) and (32), equation (27) can be rewritten in the form:

$$\frac{d\rho }{d\eta }=\gamma \rho \left[\left(\frac{\rho }{\overline{\rho }}\right)^\beta 1\right]$$
(39)
As it is easy to verify the solution of the above equation reads:

$$\rho (\eta )=\frac{\overline{\rho }}{\left(1+a\overline{\rho }^\beta exp\{\gamma \beta (\eta \eta _0)\}\right)^{\frac{1}{\beta }}}$$
(40)
or, equivalently, in terms of $`R`$ as:

$$\rho (R)=\frac{\overline{\rho }}{\left[1+a\overline{\rho }^\beta \left(\frac{R}{R_0}\right)^{3\beta \gamma }\right]^{\frac{1}{\beta }}}$$
(41)
where $`a`$ denotes an arbitrary integration constant.

By assigning the initial condition $`\rho (\eta _0)=\rho _0`$, we immediately obtain:

$$\rho _0=\frac{\overline{\rho }}{\left(1+a\overline{\rho }^\beta \right)^{\frac{1}{\beta }}}a=\left(\frac{1}{\rho _0^\beta }\frac{1}{\overline{\rho }^\beta }\right)$$
(42)
From equations (33), (40) and (42) we get the following expressions for the particles density as well as the particles number:

$$n=n_0\left(\frac{\overline{1+a\overline{\rho }}^\beta }{1+a\overline{\rho }^\beta exp\{\gamma \beta (\eta \eta _0)\}}\right)^{\frac{1}{\gamma \beta }}$$
(43)
$$N=n_0\left(\frac{(1+a\overline{\rho }^\beta )R_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{3\gamma \beta }exp\{\gamma \beta (\eta \eta _0)\}}{1+a\overline{\rho }^\beta exp\{\gamma \beta (\eta \eta _0)\}}\right)^{\frac{1}{\gamma \beta }}N_0=n_0R_0^3$$
(44)
Finally, by (22), we get the following key expression for the expansion rate of the universe:

$$H(\eta )=\sqrt{\frac{c^2\chi }{3}\frac{\overline{\rho }}{\left(1+a\overline{\rho }^\beta exp\{\gamma \beta (\eta \eta _0)\}\right)^{\frac{1}{\beta }}}\frac{c^2k}{R_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}e^{\frac{2}{3}(\eta \eta _0)}}$$
(45)
The expression (40) shows how the energy density of the universe be a nondiverging function of $`\eta `$ in correspondence to the choice $`a0`$ ($`\rho _0\overline{\rho }`$), while for $`a<0`$ ($`\rho _0>\overline{\rho }`$) it diverges when $`\eta `$ takes the value $`\eta _f=\eta _0+[ln(1/a\overline{\rho }^\beta )]/\gamma \beta `$. However, for any value of the constant $`a`$, in the limit $`\eta \mathrm{}`$, we get $`\rho \overline{\rho }`$.

As preliminary step, it is important to stress that the two cases $`a=0`$ (Bondi-Gold steady state universe) and $`a<0`$, by describing solutions in which the energy density respectively remains constant or increases monotonically (diverging for $`\eta =\eta _f`$), do not provide a suitable representation of our actual universe and therefore will be excluded from the following analysis.

Then, it is easy to realize that in the limiting case when the processes of matter creation are absent ($`\alpha =0,i.e.\overline{\rho }\mathrm{}`$), we immediately reobtain, by (45), (30) and (41), the standard FLRW dynamics. Furthermore our solution ($`a>0`$) goes over the FLRW dynamics in the limit $`\eta \mathrm{}`$, corresponding to the behaviour:

$$\rho \frac{1}{R^{3\gamma }}$$
(46)
Indeed the key difference between the Bondi-Gold steady state model and the our one, consists just of such asymptotic FLRW dynamics, which allows to overcome the two fundamental cosmological inconsistencies of a steady universe, concerning the existence of a microwaves background radiation and the unobserved level of particles creation, as required to keep constant the present energy density of the universe.

More precisely, it is easy to realize that, by a suitable finetuning of the free parameters $`\overline{\rho }`$, $`\beta `$ and $`a`$, it is possible to fit all the fundamental (predictive) features of the Standard Cosmological Model, including the nucleosynthesis process.

Let us now analyse separately the two cases $`k=0`$ and $`k=1`$ corresponding to the choice $`a>0`$.

i) Flat FLRW model

In the case of a flat FLRW model ($`k=0`$) the function $`H(\eta )`$ behaves as the square root of $`\rho (\eta )`$ and, as it is easy to realize, it vanishes for $`\eta \mathrm{}`$ while for $`\eta \mathrm{}`$ approaches the value $`c\sqrt{\chi \overline{\rho }/3}`$. Thus, in the limit $`\eta \mathrm{}`$, we get the following expressions:

$$\eta \eta _0c\sqrt{3\chi \overline{\rho }}(tt_0)R(t)R_0exp\left\{c\sqrt{\frac{\chi \overline{\rho }}{3}}(tt_0)\right\}0$$
(47)
$$\rho \overline{\rho }n\overline{n}n_0\left(\frac{\overline{\rho }}{\rho _0}\right)^{\frac{1}{\gamma }}N0$$
(48)
In addition it comes out easily from (30) and (31) that the age of the universe and the physical horizon have a diverging character.

Thus we see how the universe emerges from $`\eta =\mathrm{}`$ by an inflationary-like behaviour characterized by a (nearly) constant value of the energy and particles number densities, to be interpreted as the following asymptotic limits:

$$\overline{\rho }=\underset{\eta \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{U}{V}\overline{n}=\underset{\eta \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{N}{V}$$
(49)
being $`V`$ the considered comoving volume ($`V=R^3`$) and $`U`$ the total internal energy in it contained ($`U\rho R^3`$).

By other words, though $`U`$ and $`N`$ vanish as $`t\mathrm{}`$, nevertheless their ratio to the vanishing comoving volume $`R^3`$ approaches constant values.

ii) Negative curved FLRW model

In the case of a negative curved FLRW model ($`k=1`$) we see from (45) how the function $`H(\eta )`$ vanishes for $`\eta \mathrm{}`$ and diverges for $`\eta \mathrm{}`$. As it is easy to verify, for $`\eta \mathrm{}`$ take place the following relations:

$$\eta \eta _03ln\left(\frac{R_0+c(tt_0)}{R_0}\right)R(t)R_0+c(tt_0)0$$
(50)
$$\rho \overline{\rho }n\overline{n}n_0\left(\frac{\overline{\rho }}{\rho _0}\right)^{\frac{1}{\gamma }}N0$$
(51)
Above, the values $`\overline{\rho }`$ and $`\overline{n}`$ should be interpreted in terms of the limits (49).

By (31) it is again easy to realize that the physical horizon diverges even in the case of a negative curved FLRW universe, while by (30) the age of the universe is in this case finite $`R_0/c+tt_0`$.

Since, asymptotically, the energy density approaches the constant value $`\overline{\rho }`$, then we see how the very early dynamics results to be dominated by the spatial curvature (i. e. $`H1/R`$).

In both the above cases ($`k=0`$ and $`k=1`$), since, for $`\eta \mathrm{}`$ ($`t\mathrm{}`$) the energy density vanishes and the appropriate equation of state corresponds to $`\gamma =1`$, then. in this limit, we get $`Nn_0R_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{3}a^{1/\beta }/\rho _0=N_0a^{1/\beta }/\rho _0`$.

At the end we observe, how by (25), (29) and (32), the entropy and the temperature of the universe can be expressed respectively in terms of the particles number and number density as follows:

$$S=S_0\frac{N}{N_0}T=T_0\left(\frac{n}{n_0}\right)^{\gamma 1}$$
(52)
By the above expressions for $`N(\eta )`$ and $`n(\eta )`$, it is easy to construct the explicit functional form for $`S(\eta )`$ and $`T(\eta )`$. In particular it is worth noting how in the two cases $`k=0`$ and $`k=1`$ the entropy reaches for $`t\mathrm{}`$ the (maximum) value $`SS_0a^{1/\beta }/\rho _0`$, while the (maximum) initial value taken by the temperature is given by:

$$T_{max}=T_0\left(\frac{\overline{\rho }}{\rho _0}\right)^{1\frac{1}{\gamma }}$$
(53)
In particular for an initial radiation dominated universe ($`\gamma =4/3`$) we get the maximum value $`T_{max}^r=T_0(\overline{\rho }/\rho _0)^{1/4}`$.

Of course the values of the above maximal temperature can be suitably fixed to avoid any contraddiction with the observed universe.

## 4 Concluding Remarks

Finally we enphasize how the analysis of a positive curved FLRW universe ($`k=1`$) can not be developed in terms of our approach since the time variable $`\eta `$ would be hill-defined in the “turning point” of the universe ($`H=0`$) (as well as not applicable to the collapsing picture $`H<0`$), naturally expected in the evolution of such a model. Furthermore, as it is easy to realize, for negative values of $`H`$ the adopted ansatz would lead to a negative synchronous time rate of particles and entropy production, contraddicting the second law of thermodynamics; for these reasons, the analysis of this case requires further investigation.

As the results of our analysis show, the presence of a particles creation term deeply influences the universe dynamics, by allowing the energy density and the temperature have never diverging character. More precisely we get, as above outlined, a drastic departure from the “Standard Cosmology” only in the (very) early stages of the evolution, while for sufficiently later times (depending on the adopted choice of the free parameters), the obtained dynamics approaches the usual FLRW one.

It is worth enphasizing how, as a direct consequences of this departure, the obtained solutions for the two cases $`k=0`$ and $`k=1`$ both provide, by the diverging character of the physical horizon, a solution to the so-called horizon problem.

We conclude by observing how any physical motivation for the adopted ansatz is rather difficult to be provided since it should be referred to an average procedure over all quantum effects being active in the early universe. In particular the impossibility to make precise account for the quantum gravity effect limits strongly the physical derivation of the particles creation rate (indeed, in the framework of our phenomenological approach, the matter is created by the gravitational field itself by its time variation and the main contribution to this average effect can be expected to come from the quantum fluctuations of the cosmological background).

However, in spite of this great difficulties, the relevant influence the matter creation phenomena could have exerted on the very early universe dynamics, we believe, makes of interest any effort in this direction.

Daniele Oriti and one of the two referees are thanked for their valuable advices on this matter.

This paper was supported, in part by ICRA and mainly by INFN.

99


text:
# Virtual photon fragmentation functions

## I Introduction

Gluon distribution plays a central role in calculating many important signatures at hadron colliders because of the dominance of gluon initiated subprocesses. A precise knowledge of the gluon distribution is absolutely vital for reliable predictions for signal as well as background cross sections . A great effort has been devoted to find good physical observables for extracting information on gluon distribution .

For many years, prompt photon production has been thought as a clean signal for information on gluon distribution because its cross section at lowest order is dominated by the “Compton” subprocess: $`g+q\gamma +q`$, and this dominance is preserved at higher orders . However, the theoretical and experimental complications have limited our ability to extract clean information on gluon distribution from the direct photon data . At collider energies, prompt photons are observed and their cross sections are measured only if the photons are relatively isolated in phase space. Isolation is required to reduce various hadronic backgrounds. But at the same time, the cross section is no longer totally inclusive and theoretical predictions become sensitive to the isolation parameters . In addition, phenomenological fragmentation functions are needed for including photons emerged from the long-distance fragmentation of quarks and gluons that are themselves produced at short-distance . Our knowledge on phenomenological fragmentation functions and the theoretical uncertainties associated with the isolation prevent fully quantitative determinations of gluon distribution from the collider data on isolated photons. Although data at fixed target energies provide good information on gluon distribution at large $`x`$ , the controversy about how much $`k_T`$-smearing is required to understand the data introduces the significant uncertainties to the gluon distributions . As a result, all direct photon data were excluded from recent CTEQ global analyses of parton distributions .

Recently, Berger, Gordon, and Klasen (BGK) show that Drell-Yan transverse momentum ($`Q_T`$) distributions in hadronic collisions are dominated by partonic subprocesses initiated by incident gluons if $`Q_T>Q/2`$, where $`Q`$ is the invariant mass of the produced lepton pairs . BGK argue that Drell-Yan $`Q_T`$ distribution is an advantageous source of constraints on the gluon distribution, free from the experimental and theoretical complications of photon isolation that beset studies of prompt photon production.

Other than the difference between a virtual and a real photon, Drell-Yan and prompt photon production share the same partonic subprocesses. The virtual photon produced in Drell-Yan process subsequently decays into a pair of leptons. Since we are mainly interested in the cross section at high $`Q_T`$ and low $`Q`$, we ignore the $`Z`$ channel contributions in this paper. If we integrate over angular dependence of the lepton pairs, the Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production between hadron $`A`$ and $`B`$ can be expressed in terms of an inclusive production of a virtual photon

$$\frac{d\sigma _{AB\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}(Q)}}{dQ^2dQ_T^2dy}=\left(\frac{\alpha _{em}}{3\pi Q^2}\right)\frac{d\sigma _{AB\gamma ^{}(Q)}}{dQ_T^2dy}.$$
(1)
Because of the advantage of measuring the leptons, Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production as well as the inclusive virtual photon production defined in Eq. (1) are entirely inclusive. The usual factorization theorems in Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) should apply ,

$$\frac{d\sigma _{AB\gamma ^{}(Q)}}{dQ_T^2dy}=\underset{a,b}{}𝑑x_1\varphi _{a/A}(x_1,\mu )𝑑x_2\varphi _{b/B}(x_2,\mu )\frac{d\widehat{\sigma }_{ab\gamma ^{}(Q)}}{dQ_T^2dy}(x_1,x_2,Q,Q_T,y;\mu )$$
(2)
where $`_{a,b}`$ run over all parton flavors, the $`\varphi _{a/A}`$ and $`\varphi _{b/B}`$ are parton distributions, and $`\mu `$ represents both renormalization and factorization scale. In Eq. (2), $`d\widehat{\sigma }_{ab\gamma ^{}(Q)}/dQ_T^2dy`$ are short-distance partonic hard parts and perturbatively calculable to all orders in $`\alpha _s(\mu )`$. Similar to prompt photon production, the lowest order “Compton” subprocess to a virtual photon: $`g+q\gamma ^{}+q`$ dominates the $`Q_T`$ distributions at large $`Q_T`$ as long as the collision energy is high enough to overcome the phase space penalty caused by the virtual photon mass. Therefore, Drell-Yan $`Q_T`$ distribution at large $`Q_T`$ is an advantageous source of information on the gluon distribution .

When $`Q_TQ`$, the $`Q_T`$ distributions calculated order-by-order in $`\alpha _s`$ in the conventional fixed-order QCD perturbation theory receive a large logarithm, $`\mathrm{ln}(Q_T^2/Q^2)`$, at every power of $`\alpha _s`$ beyond the leading order. Therefore, at sufficiently large $`Q_T`$ and $`\sqrt{S}`$, the convergence of the conventional perturbative expansion in powers of $`\alpha _s`$ is impaired, and the logarithms must be resummed.

In order to resum the large logarithm, we introduce a concept of virtual photon fragmentation functions $`D_{f\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ for a parton of flavor $`f`$ to fragment into a virtual photon of invariant mass $`Q`$. Normally, a virtual particle state is not physical, and therefore, a fragmentation function to such a state may be gauge dependent and ill-defined. However, if such a virtual state immediately decays into a completely measured physical state, we believe that a fragmentation function to such a virtual state is effectively physical. The fragmentation function is experimentally measurable if the decay to the physical state is calculable.

Unlike the real photon fragmentation functions , the virtual photon fragmentation functions are fully perturbative if $`Q\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$. In terms of the virtual photon fragmentation functions, the conventional perturbative expansion for $`d\widehat{\sigma }_{ab\gamma ^{}(Q)}/dQ_T^2dy`$ in Eq. (2) can be reorganized according to a new factorization formula such that the large logarithms are resummed to all orders in $`\alpha _s`$. The detailed derivation of the new factorization formula for the virtual photon production at $`Q_TQ`$ and the discussions on the all order resummations will be published elsewhere. In this paper, we concentrate on the process independent physics associated with the virtual photon fragmentation functions.

In the next section, we derive the cut-vertex and corresponding operator definitions for virtual photon fragmentation functions. From the definitions, we derive the evolution equations (or renormalization group equations) for these fragmentation functions. We calculate the leading order evolution kernels for the evolution equations. By solving the evolution equations with the calculated evolution kernels, we derive the virtual photon fragmentation functions. We show that the virtual photon fragmentation functions are in principle perturbatively calculable to all orders in $`\alpha _s`$ if $`Q\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$.

Because of our ability of measuring the leptons, we can probe the polarization of the virtual photon in Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production. Therefore, it is also physically meaningful to define fragmentation functions to a virtual photon with a specific polarization. In Sec. III, we derive the evolution equations and the leading order evolution kernels to polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions.

In Sec. IV, we present our numerical results for virtual photon fragmentation functions. By showing the fragmentation functions at different scales, we demonstrate the evolution properties of the fragmentation functions for partons to a unpolarized as well as a polarized virtual photon. We find that fragmentation functions to a longitudinally polarized virtual photon are most important at small $`z`$, and the fragmentation functions to a transversely polarized virtual photon dominate the large $`z`$ region. When $`Q_T`$ is large while $`\sqrt{S}`$ is fixed, fragmentation functions at large $`z`$ are more relevant for calculating the cross sections. Therefore, we conclude that the virtual photons produced in a unpolarized Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production are more likely to be transversely polarized at high $`Q_T`$.

Recent data on J/$`\psi `$ polarization measured by CDF collaboration at Fermilab Tevatron seem to be inconsistent with the predictions from various models of J/$`\psi `$ production . The virtual photon production (extracted from Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production) at large $`Q_T`$ and small $`Q^2`$ has a lot in common with the J/$`\psi `$ production at high $`Q_T`$. They both have two large physical scales: $`Q_T`$ and $`Q^2`$, which is equal to $`M_{\mathrm{J}/\psi }^2`$ in the case of J/$`\psi `$ production; and $`Q_T^2`$ is much larger than $`Q^2`$. If the collision energy $`\sqrt{S}`$ is large enough and the logarithm $`\mathrm{ln}(Q_T^2/Q^2)`$ is so important that the resummed fragmentation contributions dominate the production cross sections, the virtual photon and J/$`\psi `$ production will share the same partonic subprocesses. Only difference between the virtual photon and J/$`\psi `$ production at high $`Q_T`$ is the fragmentation functions. The virtual photon fragmentation functions are completely perturbative, while the parton to J/$`\psi `$ fragmentation functions involve final-state nonperturbative interactions. Understanding the difference in such final-state interactions is very important for reliable predictions of J/$`\psi `$ production. We propose to measure the virtual photon polarization in Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production at large $`Q_T`$ and low $`Q^2`$. Because the virtual photon polarizations in Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production are completely calculable and independent of the final-state nonperturbative effect, the measurements of the virtual photon polarizations at high $`Q_T`$ provide not only a good test of QCD perturbation theory, but also a reference process to test the models of J/$`\psi `$ formation.

## II Unpolarized virtual photon fragmentation functions

Like other fragmentation functions , a virtual photon fragmentation function, $`D_{f\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ is defined as a probability density to find a virtual photon of invariant mass $`Q`$ and momentum fraction $`z`$ from a parent parton of flavor $`f`$. In this section, we derive the operator definitions for virtual photon fragmentation functions, and corresponding evolution equations. We calculate the leading order evolution kernels for the evolution equations and derive the virtual photon fragmentation functions by solving the evolution equations numerically.

In order to simply our derivations, we choose a frame in which the virtual photon is moving very fast along the $`z`$-axis,

$$Q^\mu =(Q^+,Q^{},0_T),\text{and}Q^{}=\frac{Q^2}{2Q^+}$$
(3)
with $`Q^+Q^{}`$. We also introduce two useful vectors

$$\overline{n}^\mu =(1,0,0_T)\text{and}n^\mu =(0,1,0_T)$$
(4)
with $`\overline{n}^2=n^2=0`$ and $`\overline{n}^\mu n_\mu =1`$. For any four-vector $`p`$, we have $`p^\mu \overline{n}_\mu =p^{}`$ and $`p^\mu n_\mu =p^+`$.

Consider a generic quark to virtual photon fragmentation process, as shown in Fig. 1(a). The top part, labeled by $`T`$, corresponds to the fragmentation from a quark of momentum $`k`$ to a virtual photon of invariant mass $`Q`$; and the bottom part, labeled by $`B`$, represents a short-distance hard collision at a scale $`\mu Q`$. By carrying out collinear expansion of the quark momentum $`k`$ in the $`B`$ at $`k^\mu =(Q^+/z)\overline{n}^\mu `$ and separation of the trace between the top and the bottom , we factorize the generic fragmentation process as follows,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}\mathrm{Tr}\left[B_q(\mu ,k)T_{q\gamma ^{}}(k,Q)\right]}`$ (5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z^2}\mathrm{Tr}\left[B_q(\mu ,k=\frac{Q^+}{z})\left\{\gamma ^{}\left(\frac{Q^+}{z}\right)\right\}\right]}`$ (6)
$`\times {\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma ^+}{4k^+}}z^2\delta (z{\displaystyle \frac{Q^+}{k^+}})\right\}T_{q\gamma ^{}}(k,Q)\right]`$ (7)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z^2}H_q(\mu ,k=\frac{Q^+}{z})D_{q\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F;Q)}.`$ (8)
where $`H_q(\mu ,k=Q^+/z)\mathrm{Tr}[B_q(\mu ,k=Q^+/z)\{\gamma ^{}(Q^+/z)\}]`$ represents the leading power short-distance production of a quark of momentum $`k^\mu =(Q^+/z)\overline{n}^\mu `$ and

$$D_{q\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F;Q)\frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\left\{\frac{\gamma ^+}{4k^+}z^2\delta (z\frac{Q^+}{k^+})\right\}T_{q\gamma ^{}}(k,Q)\right]$$
(9)
is the quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation function in terms of its cut-vertex definition . As shown in Fig. 1(b), the $`\{\frac{\gamma ^+}{4k^+}z^2\delta (z\frac{Q^+}{k^+})\}`$ in Eq. (9) is the corresponding cut-vertex. The cut-vertex for an antiquark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation function is the same as that for a quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation function.

Similarly, by considering a generic gluon to virtual photon fragmentation process, we derive the cut-vertex definition for the gluon-to-virtual-photon fragmentation function with the cut-vertex $`\{\frac{1}{2}d^{\mu \nu }z^2\delta (z\frac{Q^+}{k^+})\}`$, as shown in Fig. 1(c). The tensor $`d^{\mu \nu }`$ is defined as

$$d^{\mu \nu }=g^{\mu \nu }+\overline{n}^\mu n^\nu +n^\mu \overline{n}^\nu .$$
(10)
From the cut-vertex definitions in Figs. 1(b) and 1(c), we derive corresponding operator definitions for virtual photon fragmentation functions as follows. By representing the diagram in Fig. 1(b) in terms of quark fields, we have

$`D_{q\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}\left[z^2\delta (z\frac{Q^+}{k^+})\frac{1}{4k^+}\right](2\pi )^4\delta ^4(kQ\underset{X}{}k_X)\underset{X}{}\frac{d^3k_X}{(2\pi )^32E_X}}`$ (11)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\gamma ^+0|\psi _{q_i}(0)|\gamma ^{}(Q)XX\gamma ^{}(Q)|\overline{\psi }_{q_i}(0)|0\right]`$ (12)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{z}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{dy^{}}{2\pi }\mathrm{e}^{i(Q^+/z)y^{}}\frac{1}{N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\gamma ^+0|\psi _{q_i}(0)|\gamma ^{}(Q)\gamma ^{}(Q)|\overline{\psi }_{q_i}(y^{})|0\right]}.`$ (13)
where $`(1/N)_{i=1}^N`$ with $`N=3`$ indicates the average over the quark color. Similarly, we derive the operator definition for the gluon-to-virtual-photon fragmentation function,

$`D_{g\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{z^2}{2Q^+}}{\displaystyle \frac{dy^{}}{2\pi }\text{e}^{i(q^+/z)y^{}}(g_{\mu \nu })}`$ (14)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N^21}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N^21}{}}}0|F_a^{+\mu }(0)|\gamma ^{}(Q)\gamma ^{}(Q)|F_a^{+\nu }(y^{})|0.`$ (15)
Both operator definitions in Eqs. (12) and (15) are in the light-cone gauge. Proper insertion of a line integral of the color and electromagnetic potential is needed to make them both color and electromagnetic gauge invariant .

From either the cut-vertex definitions or the operator definitions, we derive the evolution equations (or renormalization group equations) for virtual photon fragmentation functions ,

$`\mu _F^2{\displaystyle \frac{d}{\mu _F^2}}D_{c\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _{em}}{2\pi }}\right)\gamma _{c\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F,\alpha _s;Q)`$ (16)
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}\right){\displaystyle \underset{d}{}}{\displaystyle _z^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dz^{}}{z^{}}}P_{cd}({\displaystyle \frac{z}{z^{}}},\alpha _s)D_{d\gamma ^{}}(z^{},\mu _F;Q),`$ (17)
where $`c,d=q,\overline{q},g`$. The fragmentation scale $`\mu _F`$ is defined to be the scale where the operators of the fragmentation functions are renormalized. We choose the $`\mu _F^2`$ to be the invariant mass of the fragmenting parton at the renormalization point.

The evolution kernels $`\gamma _{c\gamma ^{}}`$ and $`P_{cd}`$ in Eq. (17) have the following perturbative expansions,

$`\gamma _{c\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F,\alpha _s;Q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{}}\gamma _{c\gamma ^{}}^{(n)}(z,\mu _F;Q)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}\right)^n,`$ (18)
$`P_{cd}(z,\alpha _s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{}}P_{cd}^{(n)}(z)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}\right)^n,`$ (19)
where the renormalization scale dependence is suppressed. In our derivation of Eq. (17), we assume a strong ordering in partons’ invariant mass in the fragmentation sequence, except the last step (quark-to-virtual photon). As a result, the evolution kernels $`P_{cd}`$ for the homogeneous terms in Eq. (17) are the same as the kernels for the DGLAP equation . Although the evolution equations in Eq. (17) have the same functional form as that for real photon fragmentation functions , the evolution kernels $`\gamma _{c\gamma ^{}}`$ are different due to the nonvanish mass of the virtual photon.

In order to calculate the evolution kernels $`\gamma _{c\gamma ^{}}`$, we need to specify the polarization vector $`ϵ_\lambda ^\mu (Q)`$ for the virtual photon state $`|\gamma ^{}(Q)`$. For a unpolarized virtual photon, we need only the following polarization tensor,

$$P^{\mu \nu }(Q)\underset{\lambda =T,L}{}ϵ_\lambda ^\mu (Q)ϵ_\lambda ^\nu (Q),$$
(20)
where $`T`$ and $`L`$ represent the virtual photon’s transverse and longitudinal polarization, respectively. Although the evolution kernels and the fragmentation functions defined in Eqs. (12) and (15) are gauge invariant, the functional form of the polarization tensor $`P^{\mu \nu }(Q)`$ as well as the number of Feynman diagrams contributing to the evolution kernels are gauge dependent.

In the light-cone gauge, we have the polarization tensor

$$P^{\mu \nu }(Q)=g^{\mu \nu }+\frac{Q^\mu n^\nu +n^\mu Q^\nu }{Qn},$$
(21)
and have only one Feynman diagram, as shown in Fig. 1(d), which contributes to the lowest order quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation function. We obtain

$$D_{q\gamma ^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)=e_q^2\left(\frac{\alpha _{em}}{2\pi }\right)\left[\left(\frac{1+(1z)^2}{z}\right)\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{z\mu _F^2}{Q^2}\right)z\left(1\frac{Q^2}{z\mu _F^2}\right)\right],$$
(22)
where $`e_q`$ is the fractional charge for the quark of flavor $`q`$, and the fragmentation scale $`\mu _F^2Q^2/z`$ due to the kinematics.

For an arbitrary choice of gauge, we need a total of four Feynman diagrams for the lowest order quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation, as shown in Fig. 2 . The diagrams in Fig. 2 contain double “eikonal” lines, and the Feynman rules for the double “eikonal” lines can be found in Refs. . These four diagrams in Fig. 2 form a gauge invariant set at this order . Contributions of the three diagrams from Figs. 2(b) to 2(d) vanish when they are contracted by the light-cone gauge polarization tensor in Eq. (21). With the covariant polarization tensor

$$P^{\mu \nu }(Q)=g^{\mu \nu }+\frac{Q^\mu Q^\nu }{Q^2},$$
(23)
or simply $`P^{\mu \nu }(Q)=g^{\mu \nu }`$, we obtain the same lowest order quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation function in Eq. (22). Since gluon does not directly couple to a photon, we have

$$D_{g\gamma ^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)=0.$$
(24)
By applying $`\mu _F^2d/d\mu _F^2`$ to the lowest order virtual photon fragmentation functions, we obtain the lowest order evolution kernels

$`\gamma _{q\gamma ^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ $`=`$ $`e_q^2\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1+(1z)^2}{z}}z\left({\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{z\mu _F^2}}\right)\right]\theta (\mu _F^2{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{z}}),`$ (25)
$`\gamma _{g\gamma ^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (26)
With the lowest order evolution kernels $`\gamma _{q\gamma ^{}}^{(0)}`$ in Eq. (26) and $`P_{cd}^{(0)}`$ from Ref. , we solve the evolution equations in Eq. (17) for the unpolarized virtual photon fragmentation functions, and present the numerical results in Sec. IV.

## III Polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions

By measuring the momenta of both leptons in Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production, we can determine both invariant mass and polarization state of the virtual photon, which decays into the lepton-pair. Therefore, it is meaningful to define the fragmentation functions to a polarized virtual photon. In this section, we calculate the evolution kernels for the evolution equations of polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions.

Since we did not use any constraints due to the virtual photon’s polarization when we derived the cut-vertex and operator definitions for the virtual photon fragmentation functions in last section, the same definitions should be valid for fragmentation functions to a polarized virtual photon. Therefore, with a proper choice of polarization vectors $`ϵ_\lambda ^\mu (Q)`$ for a virtual photon of polarization $`\lambda `$, we can calculate the fragmentation functions to a virtual photon of a specific polarization state.

In order to specify a polarized virtual photon state, we need to define the photon’s polarization vector $`ϵ_\lambda ^\mu (Q)`$. If the photon is real ($`Q^2=0`$), it has only two transverse polarization states and its longitudinal polarization can be gauged away by an extra gauge transformation. When the photon is virtual and its quantum numbers are completely fixed by the physical observables, the extra gauge degree of freedom used to remove the longitudinal polarization at $`Q^2=0`$ is lost, and therefore, the virtual photon has three polarization states.

With our choice of the frame in which the virtual photon is moving very fast along the $`z`$-axis, we define the photon’s polarization vectors as the following,

$`ϵ_{T=1}^\mu (Q)`$ $`=`$ $`(0,1,0,0),`$ (27)
$`ϵ_{T=2}^\mu (Q)`$ $`=`$ $`(0,0,1,0),`$ (28)
$`ϵ_L^\mu (Q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}([Q^+Q^{}],0,0,[Q^++Q^{}]),`$ (29)
which are effectively the same as those in the “S-helicity” frame defined in Ref. . We obtain corresponding polarization tensors,

$$P_T^{\mu \nu }(Q)\frac{1}{2}\underset{T=1,2}{}ϵ_T^\mu (Q)ϵ_T^\nu (Q)=\frac{1}{2}d^{\mu \nu }$$
(30)
with $`d^{\mu \nu }`$ defined in Eq. (10) and

$$P_L^{\mu \nu }(Q)ϵ_L^\mu (Q)ϵ_L^\nu (Q)$$
(31)
for transversely and longitudinally polarized virtual photons, respectively. By summing over all polarization states, we should recover the polarization tensor for a unpolarized virtual photon,

$$P^{\mu \nu }(Q)=2P_T^{\mu \nu }(Q)+P_L^{\mu \nu }(Q),$$
(32)
where the factor of two represents the virtual photon’s two transverse polarization states.

Applying the transverse polarization tensor $`P_T^{\mu \nu }`$ to the lowest order Feynman diagrams in Fig. 2, we obtain the lowest order fragmentation function for a quark to a transversely polarized virtual photon as

$$D_{q\gamma _T^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)=e_q^2\left(\frac{\alpha _{em}}{2\pi }\right)\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1+(1z)^2}{z}\right)\left[\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{z\mu _F^2}{Q^2}\right)\left(1\frac{Q^2}{z\mu _F^2}\right)\right]$$
(33)
with $`\mu _F^2Q^2/z`$. Again, the lowest order fragmentation function for a gluon to a photon vanishes, $`D_{g\gamma _T^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)=0`$. Corresponding evolution kernels are given by

$`\gamma _{q\gamma _T^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ $`=`$ $`e_q^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+(1z)^2}{z}}\right)\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{z\mu _F^2}}\right]\theta (\mu _F^2{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{z}}),`$ (34)
$`\gamma _{g\gamma _T^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (35)
As expected, when $`Q0`$, $`2\gamma _{q\gamma _T^{}}^{(0)}`$ in Eq. (35) reduces to the lowest order evolution kernels for the real photon fragmentation functions .

Similarly, by applying the longitudinal polarization tensor $`P_L^{\mu \nu }`$ in Eq. (31) to the Feynman diagrams in Fig. 2, we derive

$$D_{q\gamma _L^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)=e_q^2\left(\frac{\alpha _{em}}{2\pi }\right)\left[2\left(\frac{1z}{z}\right)\right]\left(1\frac{Q^2}{z\mu _F^2}\right),$$
(36)
with $`\mu _F^2Q^2/z`$, and $`D_{g\gamma _L^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)=0`$. Our lowest order fragmentation function to a longitudinally polarized virtual photon in Eq. (36) is consistent with the result derived by Braaten and Lee . The $`(1z)`$ factor in Eq. (36) is a consequence of the vector interaction between the quark and photon. As a consistency check, our lowest order polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions in Eqs. (33) and (36) satisfy

$$2D_{q\gamma _T^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)+D_{q\gamma _L^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)=D_{q\gamma ^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q),$$
(37)
where $`D_{q\gamma ^{}}^{(0)}`$ is given in Eq. (22). From Eq. (36), we derive the evolution kernels for longitudinally polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions

$`\gamma _{q\gamma _L^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ $`=`$ $`e_q^2\left[2\left({\displaystyle \frac{1z}{z}}\right)\right]\left({\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{z\mu _F^2}}\right)\theta (\mu _F^2{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{z}}),`$ (38)
$`\gamma _{g\gamma _L^{}}^{(0)}(z,\mu _F;Q)`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (39)
Again, we have $`2\gamma _{q\gamma _T^{}}^{(0)}+\gamma _{q\gamma _L^{}}^{(0)}=\gamma _{q\gamma ^{}}^{(0)}`$.

Since the polarized evolution kernels and the polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions are gauge invariant, we can also derive them from the single diagram in Fig. 1(d) in the light-cone gauge. Substituting $`Q^\mu =Q^+\overline{n}^\mu +Q^{}n^\mu `$ into the polarization tensor in the light-cone gauge in Eq. (21), we obtain

$$P^{\mu \nu }(Q)=d^{\mu \nu }+\frac{Q^2}{(Q^+)^2}n^\mu n^\nu .$$
(40)
Since the vector $`n^\mu `$ used to fix the light-cone gauge does not have transverse component, the $`d^{\mu \nu }`$ in Eq. (40) should still be identified as $`2P_T^{\mu \nu }(Q)`$. From Eq. (32), we obtain the polarization tensor for a longitudinally polarized virtual photon

$$P_L^{\mu \nu }(Q)=\frac{Q^2}{(Q^+)^2}n^\mu n^\nu $$
(41)
in the light-cone gauge. Applying this $`P_L^{\mu \nu }(Q)`$ to the Feynman diagram in Fig. 1(d), we can derive the lowest order fragmentation functions to a longitudinally polarized virtual photon. As expected, the derived fragmentation functions are the same as those given in Eq. (36).

Since the fragmentation functions to a polarized and a unpolarized virtual photon share the same form of the operator definitions, the evolution equations for polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions have the same functional form as that in Eq. (17), except the evolution kernels $`\gamma _{c\gamma ^{}}`$ are replaced by those in Eq. (35) and Eq. (39) for transversely polarized and longitudinally polarized virtual photon, respectively. Since the evolution kernels $`P_{cd}`$ are independent of the polarization of the produced virtual photon, they should remain the same.

## IV Numerical Results and Conclusions

In last two sections, we derived the analytical expressions for the lowest order parton-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions with the virtual photon unpolarized as well as polarized. The lowest order gluon-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions vanish while the lowest order quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions are given in Eqs. (22), (33), and (36) for unpolarized, transversely polarized, and longitudinally polarized, respectively. Strong interactions in the top blob of the cut-vertex diagrams in Figs. 1(b) and 1(c) can change the $`z`$ as well as the $`\mu _F`$ dependence of the lowest order virtual photon fragmentation functions. Solving the evolution equations in Eq. (17) is effectively to resum all leading logarithmic contributions from the strong interactions. The power corrections from the strong interactions O($`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}^2/\mu _F^2`$) are not included in the evolution equations.

In order to solve the evolution equations in Eq. (17), we need to specify a boundary condition. Unlike the real photon fragmentation functions, we do not need any nonperturbative input distributions if the invariant mass $`Q\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$. From the pure kinematics, we have the following boundary condition for solving the evolution equations in Eq. (17),

$$D_{f\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F^2Q^2/z;Q)=0$$
(42)
for all parton flavor $`f=q,\overline{q},g`$ and any polarization of the virtual photon.

Since the boundary conditions given in Eq. (42) are the same for all flavors of massless partons, and the evolution kernels $`\gamma _{c\gamma ^{}}`$ in Eq. (17) are the same for a quark $`q`$ and corresponding antiquark $`\overline{q}`$, we have

$$D_{q\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F;Q)=D_{\overline{q}\gamma ^{}}(z,\mu _F;Q)$$
(43)
for all quark flavor $`q`$. By neglecting the quark mass difference, the only flavor dependence of the evolution kernels $`\gamma _{c\gamma ^{}}`$ in Eq. (17) is from quark’s fractional charge $`e_q`$. Therefore, quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions are the same for all quark flavors with the same fractional charge.

With the boundary condition given in Eq. (42), we can solve the evolution equations in Eq. (17) in the moment-space analytically, and then, perform the Mellin transformation from the moment-space back to the $`z`$-space . However, we find that it is easier to solve the evolution equations numerically in the $`z`$-space directly.

In Figs. 3(a) and 3(b), we plot the derived lowest order quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions as a function of the momentum fraction $`z`$ at a fragmentation scale $`\mu _F=10`$ GeV and $`\mu _F=50`$ GeV, respectively. We choose $`e_q=2/3`$ for the quark’s fractional charge, and the virtual photon’s invariant mass to be $`Q=5`$ GeV. The unpolarized quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions given in Eq. (22) are represented by the solid lines. The transversely and longitudinally polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions given in Eqs. (33) and (36) are represented by the dashed and dotted lines, respectively. The solid lines are equal to twice of the dashed lines plus the dotted lines. which is a consequence of Eq. (37).

From Fig. 3, we find that longitudinally polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions are much larger than the transversely polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions when $`z`$ is small. The small $`z`$ region corresponds to the region where $`\mu _F^2`$ is close to the threshold $`Q^2/z`$. Near the threshold, the evolution kernels for the transversely polarized fragmentation functions $`\gamma _{q\gamma _T^{}}(0)`$ in Eq. (35) vanish while the kernels for the longitudinally polarized fragmentation functions $`\gamma _{q\gamma _L^{}}^{(0)}`$ in Eq. (39) are finite and large. The $`\gamma _{q\gamma _L^{}}^{(0)}`$ are actually proportional to $`1/z`$ when $`\mu _F^2Q^2/z`$. Therefore, the longitudinally polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions dominate the small $`z`$ or the threshold region.

On the other hand, the fragmentation functions for a transversely polarized virtual photon evolve much faster than the longitudinally polarized fragmentation functions in the large $`z`$ region, as shown in Fig. 3. This is because the evolution kernels $`\gamma _{q\gamma _L^{}}^{(0)}`$ for the longitudinally polarized virtual photon fragmentation functions are power suppressed (proportional to $`1/\mu _F^2`$) and also vanish as $`z1`$.

In order to see the effect of resumming the large logarithms from quark and gluon radiations, we numerically solve the evolution equations in Eq. (17) with the lowest order evolution kernels $`\gamma _{q\gamma ^{}}^{(0)}`$ and $`P_{cd}^{(0)}`$. We plot the comparison between the lowest order (dashed) and the QCD evolved (solid) quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions at $`Q=5`$ GeV and $`\mu _F=50`$ GeV in Fig. 4(a). The symbols: U, T, and L represent the fragmentation functions to a unpolarized, transversely polarized, and longitudinally polarized virtual photon, respectively. Like the evolution of parton distributions, QCD evolution tries to enlarge the fragmentation functions in the small $`z`$ region, and to suppress the fragmentation functions in the large $`z`$ region. The difference between the QCD evolved and lowest order fragmentation functions at $`Q=5`$ GeV is small because of the boundary conditions in Eq. (42). However, when $`Q`$ is smaller or $`\mu _F`$ is larger, we expect QCD evolution to be much more important because of a larger logarithm $`\mathrm{ln}(\mu _F^2/Q^2)`$. For example, cross sections for virtual photon production ware measured by UA1 Collaboration at CERN for the virtual photon mass $`Q[2m_\mu ,2.5]`$ GeV . Instead of $`Q=5`$ GeV in Fig. 4(a), we plot the same quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions at $`Q=1.5`$ GeV in Fig. 4(b). Clearly, QCD evolved virtual photon fragmentation functions in Fig. 4(b) are enhanced in comparison with those in Fig. 4(a), particularly, in the small $`z`$ region.

Although we do not have the lowest order gluon-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions due to $`\gamma _{g\gamma ^{}}^{(0)}=0`$, QCD evolution in Eq. (17) can generate the gluon-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions. In Figs. 5(a) and 5(b), we plot gluon-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions at $`\mu _F=10`$ GeV and $`\mu _F=50`$ GeV, respectively. The virtual photon mass is again chosen to be $`Q=5`$ GeV. As shown in Fig. 5, QCD evolution generated gluon-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions at $`Q=5`$ GeV grow very fast when the fragmentation scale $`\mu _F^2`$ increases. They are about two orders of magnitude smaller than the quark-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions at $`\mu _F=10`$ GeV, and only one order of magnitude smaller at $`\mu _F=50`$ GeV. Therefore, at $`Q=1.5`$ GeV or at a larger value of $`\mu _F`$, QCD generated gluon-to-virtual-photon fragmentation functions become more important.

In conclusion, we have argued that virtual photon fragmentation functions are well-defined and physically meaningful. We derive the evolution equations for virtual photon fragmentation functions, and show that these fragmentation functions are perturbatively calculable. We demonstrate that QCD resummation of the large logarithms caused by quark and gluon radiation provides a very important contribution to the fragmentation functions when the fragmentation scale $`\mu _F`$ is large and/or the invariant mass $`Q`$ is relatively small. Just like pion fragmentation functions , the virtual photon fragmentation functions derived here are universal and can be applied to any processes with massive lepton-pair production. In the rest of this paper, we discuss some potential applications of our results.

Contributions of fragmentation functions $`D(z)`$ to the physical observables generally depend on the production of the parent partons at the same $`z`$. Since the cross sections for producing the parent partons strongly depend on the momenta of the produced partons, the role of the fragmentation functions may be different for different regions of the $`z`$ values. For example, for the Drell-Yan production, if the cross section is dominated by the small $`z`$ region, the produced virtual photons will likely be longitudinally polarized. On the other hand, if the cross section is dominated by the large $`z`$ region, the virtual photon will be transversely polarized. For a fixed collision energy $`\sqrt{S}`$, the Drell-Yan cross sections depend on the $`z`$-value from $`z_{min}=\sqrt{(Q^2+Q_T^2)/S}[\mathrm{e}^y+\mathrm{e}^y]`$ to 1 with the rapidity $`y`$. For $`Q=5`$ GeV and $`y=0`$ at $`\sqrt{S}=2`$ TeV (the new Tevatron energy), $`z_{min}0.01`$ and 0.05 for $`Q_T=10`$ and 50 GeV, respectively. It is clear from Fig. 3(b) that the produced virtual photons at $`Q_T50`$ GeV are more likely to be transversely polarized. At $`Q_T=10`$ GeV, the longitudinally polarized fragmentation functions in Fig. 3(a) are much larger than the transverse fragmentation functions in small $`z`$ region, and the $`1/z^2`$ factor in Eq. (8) for the convolution over $`z`$ is also favor for producing a longitudinally polarized virtual photon. But, the cross section for producing a parent parton of momentum $`k_T`$ at small $`zQ_T/k_T`$ is a very steep falling function of $`k_T`$, and consequently, it strongly reduces the rate for producing a longitudinally polarized virtual photon. In conclusion, when $`Q_T`$ is large, the virtual photon produced in Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production is more likely to be transversely polarized.

Recently, it was found that the J/$`\psi `$ mesons produced at Fermilab Tevatron become more longitudinally polarized as the transverse momentum increases . On the other hand, various theoretical calculations predict the J/$`\psi `$ mesons to be more transversely polarized . The virtual photon production (extracted from Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production) at large $`Q_T`$ and small $`Q^2`$ has a lot in common with the J/$`\psi `$ production at high $`Q_T`$. They both have two large physical scales: $`Q_T`$ and $`Q^2`$, which is equal to $`M_{\mathrm{J}/\psi }^2`$ in the case of J/$`\psi `$ production; and $`Q_T^2`$ is much larger than $`Q^2`$. If the collision energy $`\sqrt{S}`$ is large enough and the logarithm $`\mathrm{ln}(Q_T^2/Q^2)`$ is so important that the resummed fragmentation contributions dominate the production cross sections, the virtual photon and J/$`\psi `$ production will share the same partonic subprocesses, labeled by the $`R`$ in Fig. 6. With their respected fragmentation functions, both the virtual photon and J/$`\psi `$ production at high $`Q_T`$ are perturbatively calculable . As discussed above, the virtual photon fragmentation functions are completely perturbative, while the parton to J/$`\psi `$ fragmentation functions involve final-state nonperturbative interactions. Therefore, only difference between the virtual photon and J/$`\psi `$ production at high $`Q_T`$ and large $`\sqrt{S}`$ is the final-state strong interactions during the formation of J/$`\psi `$ meson. We propose to measure the virtual photon polarization in Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production at large $`Q_T`$ and low $`Q^2`$. The measurements of the virtual photon’s polarization at high $`Q_T`$ provide not only a good test of QCD perturbation theory, but also a reference process to test the models of J/$`\psi `$ formation.

As shown in Fig. 6, the fragmentation functions from a parton $`d`$ to a physical J/$`\psi `$ can be approximated by the fragmentation functions to a virtual gluon of invariant mass $`Q`$, which immediately decay into a $`c\overline{c}`$-pair, convoluted with a transition from the $`c\overline{c}`$-pair to a physical J/$`\psi `$ . The fragmentation functions for a parton to a virtual gluon should be perturbatively calculable, and their dependence on the polarization should be very similar to that of the virtual photon fragmentation functions. But, the produced charm and anticharm quark pair of invariant mass $`Q`$ can in principle radiate gluons and have soft interactions with other partons in the collisions. However, due to the heavy quark mass, such final-state interactions during the formation or transition from the produced $`c\overline{c}`$-pair to a physical J/$`\psi `$ meson are not expected to significantly change the polarization . If the formation from the $`c\overline{c}`$-pair of invariant mass $`Q`$ to a physical J/$`\psi `$ meson does not change the polarization, one can expect the polarization of the J/$`\psi `$ mesons produced at high $`Q_T`$ to be similar to the polarization of the virtual photon in Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production at the same kinematics. For example, the non-relativistic QCD (NRQCD) model of J/$`\psi `$ production predicts the J/$`\psi `$ mesons to be transversely polarized at large transverse momentum , which is not consistent with recent Fermilab data . Since the leptons do not interact strongly once produced, the measurements of the virtual photon polarization in Drell-Yan massive lepton-pair production at large transverse momentum should help us to narrow the questions about J/$`\psi `$ production.

## Acknowledgment

We thank G. Sterman for very helpful discussions. This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG02-87ER40731.