text:
# On Morrison’s cone conjecture for klt surfaces with 𝐾_𝑋≡0

## 0. Introduction

Let $`X`$ be a normal projective complex surface with at worst Kawamata log terminal singularities (klt singularities) and $`K_X0`$. By the classification of surfaces, $`X`$ is either an Abelian surface, a hyperelliptic surface, a K3 surface with only rational double points (RDPs), an Enriques surface with only RDPs or a log Enriques surface. Here a log Enriques surface (compare Zhang \[Zh\]) is a rational normal projective surface with at worst klt singularities and $`K_X0`$.

The aim of this paper is to study the $`2`$-dimensional klt analogue of the following conjecture of Morrison:

###### Conjecture 0.1 (Morrison’s Cone Conjecture \[M3, Section 4\]).

Let $`V`$ be a Calabi–Yau manifold, $`𝒜(V)`$ its ample cone, and $`𝒜^{}(V)`$ the convex hull of its rational ample cone $`\overline{𝒜(V)}H^2(V,)`$. Then there exists a rational polyhedral cone $`\mathrm{\Delta }𝒜^{}(V)`$ such that $`\mathrm{Aut}V\mathrm{\Delta }=𝒜^{}(V)`$.

Our main result is as follows:

###### Theorem 0.2 (Main Theorem).

Let $`X`$ be a normal projective complex surface with at worst klt singularities and $`K_X0`$. Then there exists a rational finite polyhedral cone $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ which is a fundamental domain for the action of $`\mathrm{Aut}X`$ on $`𝒜^{}(X)`$ in the sense that

1. $`𝒜^{}(X)=_{\theta \mathrm{Aut}X}\theta _{}\mathrm{\Delta }`$,
2. $`\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Delta }\theta _{}\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{}`$ unless $`\theta _{}=\mathrm{id}`$.

This conjecture is known for a smooth Abelian variety (Kawamata \[Kaw\]) or a smooth K3 surface (Sterk \[St\]). Our new result covers the remaining cases.

The plan of the proof is as follows: for $`X`$ as in Theorem 0.2, write $`I=I(X)`$ for the (global) index of $`X`$, that is, the smallest positive integer such that $`IK_X`$ is Cartier and linearly equivalent to zero and $`\pi :Y:=\mathrm{Spec}(_{i=0}^{I1}𝒪_X(iK_X))X`$ for the (global) index one cover of $`X`$. Then $`\pi :YX`$ is a Galois finite cover with Galois group $`G=g/I`$, and $`g^{}(\omega _Y)=\zeta _I\omega _Y`$, where $`\omega _Y`$ is a generator of $`H^0(𝒪_Y(K_Y))`$ and $`\zeta _I`$ a primitive $`I`$th root of 1. It is known that $`YX`$ is etale in codimension 1, so that $`G`$ admits no pointwise fixed curve. Since $`Y`$ is a projective surface with only RDPs and $`𝒪_Y(K_Y)𝒪_Y`$, it is either a projective K3 surface with only RDPs or a smooth Abelian surface. We treat log Enriques surfaces according to this case division.

In Section 1, we consider the case where the global index one cover $`Y`$ is an Abelian surface. In this case the theorem follows from Kawamata’s result \[Kaw\] and the Torelli theorem for Abelian surface (Shioda \[S\]). In the course of the proof, we also classify log Enriques surfaces whose index one cover is an Abelian surface. Section 2 considers the case where $`Y`$ is a K3 surface with at worst RDPs. In this case, we use the equivariant version of Torelli theorem (Oguiso and Sakurai \[OS\]) and Morrison’s weakly polarized global Torelli theorem for K3 surfaces \[M2\]. Our result Theorem 2.1 is slightly stronger than we need.

### Acknowledgements

The author would like to express her deep gratitude to Professor Keiji Oguiso for his valuable comments and unceasing encouragement. She also thanks Professor Yujiro Kawamata who for stimulating discussion and Professor Miles Reid for help with the English.

## 1. The case where the index one cover is an Abelian surface

Assume first that $`X`$ is an Abelian surface. In this case, we obtain the result at once from the following theorem.

###### Theorem 1.1 (Kawamata \[Kaw, Theorem 2.1\]).

Assume that $`X`$ is anAbelian surface. Then, there exists a finite rational polyhedral cone $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ which is a fundamental domain for the action of $`\mathrm{Aut}X`$ on $`𝒜^{}(X)`$ in the sense that

1. $`𝒜^{}(X)=_{\theta \mathrm{Aut}X}\theta _{}\mathrm{\Delta }`$,
2. $`\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Delta }\theta _{}\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{}`$ unless $`\theta _{}=\mathrm{id}`$.

The case of a hyperelliptic surface $`X`$ is trivial: Since $`\rho (X)=2`$ and $`\overline{NS}X`$ is spanned by its two elliptic fibrations, each of which is invariant under $`\mathrm{Aut}X`$.

Next, consider the case of a log Enriques surface $`X`$ whose index one cover $`Y`$ is a smooth Abelian surface.

###### Proposition 1.2.

Let $`X`$ be a log Enriques surface whose index one cover $`(Y,g)`$ is an Abelian surface. Then $`YX`$ is isomorphic to one of the following two cases:

1. $`Y=E_{\zeta _3}^2`$ and $`g_3=\mathrm{diag}(\zeta _3,\zeta _3)`$; here $`E_{\zeta _3}`$ is the elliptic curve with multiplication by $`\zeta _3`$. Or
2. $`Y=`$ the Jacobian surface $`J(C)`$ of the genus two curve $`C:y^2=x^51`$, and the automorphism $`g_5`$ of order $`5`$ is induced by the automorphism $`(x,y)(\zeta _5x,y)`$ of $`C`$.

Our proof of Proposition 1.2 is similar to Oguiso \[O, Lemma 1.1\].

###### Lemma 1.3 (Oguiso).

Let $`X`$ be a log Enriques surface whose index one cover $`(Y,g)`$ is an Abelian surface. Then

1. $`I=\mathrm{ord}g=3`$ or $`5`$;
2. $`(Y,g)`$ is isomorphic to $`(E_{\zeta _3}^2,g_3)`$ if $`I=3`$;
3. $`(Y,g)`$ is isomorphic to $`(J(C),g_5)`$ if $`I=5`$.

###### Proof.

Write $`Y`$ as $`V/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, where $`V=^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a discrete $``$-submodule of $`V`$ of rank $`4`$. Since $`G`$ does not have any nonzero translations, $`g`$ has a fixed point:

###### Claim 1.4.

$`g`$ has a fixed point, that is, there exists $`pY`$ such that $`g(p)=p`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`\mathrm{Aut}Y=Y\mathrm{Aut}_{\mathrm{Lie}}(Y)`$, in suitable coordinates, we can write

$$g^{}\left(\begin{array}{c}x\\ y\end{array}\right)=A\left(\begin{array}{c}x\\ y\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{c}a_1\\ a_2\end{array}\right).$$

Since $`g`$ is of finite order, we may take $`A`$ as a diagonal matrix $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & 0\\ 0& \beta \end{array}\right)`$.

It suffices to show that $`\alpha ,\beta 1`$. We derive a contradition from the assumption $`\alpha =1`$. Recall that $`Y^g\mathrm{}`$. Then there exists $`k<\mathrm{ord}g`$ such that $`Y^{g^k}\mathrm{}`$. We can write

$$g_{}^{k}{}_{}{}^{}\left(\begin{array}{c}x\\ y\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& \beta ^k\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}x\\ y\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{c}b_1\\ b_2\end{array}\right)\text{for some }b_1,b_2\text{.}$$

Let $`p=\left(\begin{array}{c}x\\ y\end{array}\right)Y^{g^k}`$. Then $`x=x+b_1`$ leads to $`b_1=0`$. Thus the curve $`(y=0)`$ in $`Y`$ is contained in $`Y^g`$. This contradicts the fact that $`Y^g`$ is a finite set. ∎

Since $`Y`$ is an Abelian surface, there exist global coordinates $`(x,y)`$ of $`Y`$ centered at a fixed point of $`g`$ such that $`g^{}(x,y)=(ax,by)`$. Recall that $`g^{}\omega _Y=\zeta _I\omega _Y`$, where $`\mathrm{ord}g=I`$ and $`Y^g`$ is a finite set. Then we have $`g=\mathrm{diag}(\zeta _I^{k_1},\zeta _I^{k_2})`$ for some integers $`k_1`$ and $`k_2`$ where each $`k_i`$ is coprime to $`I`$.

Let $`[g]`$ be the group algebra of the cyclic group $`g`$ over $``$. Clearly, $`[g][x]/(x^I1)`$. The action of $`g`$ on $`V`$ defines a natural $`[g]`$-module structure on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$: $`F(g)(\lambda )=\mathrm{diag}(F(\zeta _I^{k_1}),F(\zeta _I^{k_2}))\lambda `$.

Write $`\mathrm{\Phi }_I(x)`$ for the $`I`$th cyclotomic polynomial. Since $`\mathrm{Ann}\mathrm{\Lambda }=(\mathrm{\Phi }_I(g))`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a torsion free $`[g]/(\mathrm{\Phi }_I(g)`$-module. This also holds for $`V`$.

Tensoring with $``$ the tower of modules $`[\zeta _I]\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, gives the tower of vector spaces $`[\zeta _I]\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Then we get $`\varphi (d)dim_{[\zeta _I]}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{})=4`$, where $`\varphi `$ is the Euler function. Thus, $`\varphi (d)`$ is either 2 or 4. Combining this with the fact $`I`$ is not divisible by 2 (\[Zh, Lemma 2.2\]), we get $`I`$ is either 3 or 5.

For the case of $`I=3`$, we have $`g^{}\omega _Y=\zeta _3\omega _Y`$. Therefore $`ab=\zeta _3`$. We also see that $`a`$ and $`b`$ must be roots of unity. Recall that neither $`a`$ nor $`b`$ is $`1`$. Thus, we conclude that $`(a,b)=(\zeta _3^2,\zeta _3^2)`$. Changing the generator by $`g`$ to $`g^2`$, we obtain $`g^{}(x,y)=(\zeta _3x,\zeta _3y)`$. Since $`V`$ is the direct sum of some eigenspaces corresponding to the indicated eigenvalues of the action of $`\zeta _I1`$ on the space $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ must be a free $`[\zeta _I]`$-module of rank $`4/\varphi (I)`$. This gives $`\varphi _3:\mathrm{\Lambda }[\zeta _3]^2`$.

Next we consider the eigenspace decomposition:

$$[\zeta _I]_{}=\underset{\begin{array}{c}0<i<m\\ (m,d)=1\end{array}}{}V(m),$$

where $`V(m)`$ denotes the eigenspace of the eigenvalue $`\zeta _I^m`$. In our case, we obtain the following $`\varphi _I`$-equivariant eigenspace decompositions:

$$[\zeta _3]^2_{}=V(1)^2V(2)^2\text{and}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}=V^{}(1)V^{}(2).$$

Therefore we have $`\varphi _3:(Y,g)=(V^{}(1)/\mathrm{\Lambda },\zeta _3)(V(1)^2/[\zeta _3],\zeta _3)`$. In particular, $`(E_{\zeta _3}^2,g_3)(V(1)^2/[\zeta _3],\zeta _3)`$.

If $`I=5`$, then the same argument gives $`(a,b)=(\zeta _5^3,\zeta _5^3)`$, $`(\zeta _5^2,\zeta _5^4)`$ or $`(\zeta _5^4,\zeta _5^2)`$. Changing the generator again, we obtain $`g^{}(x,y)=(\zeta _5x,\zeta _5y)`$, $`(\zeta _5x,\zeta _5^2y)`$. However the first case cannot happen because $`\mathrm{rank}\mathrm{\Lambda }=4`$. Therefore, $`g^{}(x,y)=(\zeta _5x,\zeta _5^2y)`$. Then in a similar way we have $`\varphi _5:\mathrm{\Lambda }[\zeta _5]`$.

Since $`[\zeta _5]_{}=_{m=1}^4V(m)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}=_{m=1}^4V^{}(m)`$, we have $`\varphi _5:(Y,g)=(V(1)V(2))/[\zeta _5],\zeta _5)`$ and $`(J(C),g_5)(V(1)V(2))/[\zeta _5],\zeta _5)`$. This gives the result. ∎

In the rest of the proof $`X`$ is a log Enriques surface; the proof reduces to solving the following proposition, with $`YX`$ the index one cover of $`X`$ and $`g`$ a generator of the Galois group:

###### Proposition 1.5.

There exists a finite rational polyhedral cone $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ inside $`𝒜^{}(Y)`$ such that $`𝒜^{}(Y)^g=\mathrm{Aut}(Y,g)\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$.

We need the following theorem due to Shioda:

###### Theorem 1.6 (\[S, Theorem 1\]).

Let $`Y`$ and $`Y^{}`$ be Abelian surfaces over $``$, and let

$$\phi :H^2(Y,)H^2(Y^{},)$$

be an isomorphism of Euclidean lattices. Denote the period map of $`Y`$ (resp. Y’) by $`p_Y`$ (resp. $`p_Y^{}`$). Then the necessary and sufficient condition for the isomorphism $`\phi `$ or $`\phi `$ to be induced by an isomorphism $`f:Y^{}Y`$ is that $`\phi `$ satisfies the following conditions:

1. $`det\phi =+1`$, and
2. $`p_Y^{}\phi =\mathrm{const}.p_Y`$ (that is, $`\phi `$ preserves the periods).

If $`I=3`$, we take a basis of $`N^1Y`$ as $`D_i=\mathrm{pr}_i^{}(0)`$ for $`i=1,2`$, $`E_1=\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`E_2=\mathrm{\Gamma }_f`$, where $`\mathrm{pr}_i`$ are the projections, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ denotes the diagonal and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_f`$ is the graph of $`f:E_{\zeta _3}E_{\zeta _3}`$ induced by $`p\zeta _3p`$. Then the action of $`g`$ on $`N^1Y`$ is trivial and Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.6 give the result immediately.

In the case $`I=5`$, from $`g^{}\omega =\zeta _5\omega `$, the eigenvalues of $`g`$ on $`T_Y`$ are $`\zeta _5,\zeta _5^2,\zeta _5^3`$ and $`\zeta _5^4`$, and $`T`$ is the minimal lattice which contains 2-form $`\omega `$. Then we have $`\mathrm{rank}T_Y=4`$. Since $`N^1Y=T_Y^{}`$, we have $`\mathrm{rank}N^1Y=2`$ and the action of $`g`$ on $`N^1Y`$ is trivial. Thus Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.6 again give the result.

###### Remark 1.7.

By the reduction theory and explicit calculation, in the case $`I=3`$ we have

$$\begin{array}{c}_0\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)+_0\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)\hfill \\ \hfill +_0\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 1+\zeta _3\\ \overline{1+\zeta _3}& 2\end{array}\right)+_0\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 1\zeta _3\\ \overline{1\zeta _3}& 2\end{array}\right)\end{array}$$

as $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, under the identification

$$\mathrm{im}(\sigma :\mathrm{Aut}Y\mathrm{GL}(N^1Y,))\mathrm{GL}(2,[\zeta _3]).$$

.

## 2. The case where the index one cover is a K3 surface <br>with only RDPs

In this section, we prove the following Theorem 2.1, which is slightly stronger than necessary for the main result. Indeed, we obtain Theorem 0.2 as a corollary on taking $`G`$ as the Galois group of the index one cover and applying Theorem 2.1.

Let $`𝒜^{}(Y)`$ be the convex hull of the rational ample cone of $`Y`$, and $`𝒜(Y)^G`$ be its $`G`$-fixed part. $`𝒜(Y,G):=\left\{\varphi Y\right|\varphi g=g\varphi \text{ for any }gG\}`$.

###### Theorem 2.1.

Let $`Y`$ be a K3 surface with only RDPs and $`G`$ a finite subgroup of $`\mathrm{Aut}Y`$. Then there exists a finite rational polyhedral cone $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ which is a fundamental domain for the action of $`\mathrm{Aut}(Y,G)`$ on $`𝒜^{}(Y)^G`$ in the sense that

1. $`𝒜^{}(Y)^G=_{\theta \mathrm{Aut}(Y,G)}\theta _{}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$,
2. $`\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\theta _{}\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Delta }^{}=\mathrm{}`$ unless $`\theta _{}=\mathrm{id}`$.

Let $`\nu :ZY`$ be the minimal resolution of $`Y`$ and $`_{i=1}^mE_i`$ the exceptional divisor. From now, we mainly work on $`Z`$.

Our proof proceeds on similar lines to Oguiso and Sakurai \[OS\]. We first fix the notation adopted in our argument below.

From the uniqueness of the minimal resolution, we have the natural automorphism of $`Z`$ which corresponds to $`g`$. We denote this by $`g`$ again. Let $`H^2(Z,){}_{}{}^{W}=\{DH^2(Z,)|(DE_i)=0\text{ for all }i\}`$. We set

$`S^{}`$ $`:=H^{1,1}(Z,)H^2(Z,){}_{}{}^{W};`$
$`S`$ $`:=(S^{})^G=\left\{DS^{}\right|g^{}(D)=D\text{ for all }gG\};`$
$`T`$ $`:=\{D^{}H^2(Z,){}_{}{}^{W}|(D^{}D)=0\text{ for all }DS\};`$
$`S^{}`$ $`:=\mathrm{Hom}(S,);`$
$`𝒜`$ $`:=(𝒜^{})^G=𝒜^{}S_{};`$
$`𝒞^{}`$ is the positive cone of $`X`$, that is, the connected component of the space $`\left\{DN^1X_{}\right|(DD)>0\}`$ containing the ample classes.

$`𝒞^{}`$ is the union of $`𝒞^{}`$ and all $``$-rational rays in the boundary $`(𝒞^{})^{}`$ of $`𝒞^{}`$.

$`𝒞:=(𝒞^{})^G`$;

$`Q_Z:=\left\{f\mathrm{Aut}Z\right|fg=gf\text{ for all }gG\}`$;

$`O(S)^{}:=`$ the orthogonal group of the lattice $`S^{}`$ which preserves the positive cone $`C`$.

$`O(S)^+:=`$ the set of $`\sigma O(S)^{}`$ that are Hodge isometries of $`H^2(Z,)^W`$ and extend to Hodge isometries of $`H^2(Z,)`$ satisfying $`\sigma g^{}=g^{}\sigma `$ for all $`gG`$ (the last condition implies $`\sigma (S)=S`$);

$`P(S):=\left\{\sigma O(S)^{}\right|\sigma (A)=A\}`$;

$$P(S)^+:=\{\sigma O(S)^{}|\begin{array}{c}\sigma =f^{}{}_{|S}{}^{}\text{ for some }fQ_Z\hfill \\ \text{and }f\text{ comes from }f^{}Q_Y\hfill \end{array}\}.$$

In other words, $`P(S)^+`$ is the image of the group homomorphism of $`Q_ZP(S)`$ which maps from $`f`$ to $`f^{}_{|S}`$; this implies that $`\sigma (𝒜)=𝒜`$ for each $`\tau P(S)^+`$.

Then we have the following:

###### Lemma 2.2.

1. $`S`$ is an even hyperbolic lattice if $`\mathrm{rank}S1`$.
2. The interior $`𝒜^{}`$ of $`𝒜`$ consists of the $`G`$-invariant ample classes of $`Y`$ and is nonempty. Moreover, $`𝒜^{}=(𝒜^{})^{}S_{}`$.
3. Set $`O(S)^{++}:=\{\tau O(S)^{}|\tau {}_{|S^{}/S}{}^{}=\mathrm{id}\}`$. Then $`O(S)^{++}O(S)^+O(S)^{}`$ with each inclusion of finite index.

###### Proof.

The assertions (1), (2) are clear. The last statement (3) comes from the fact that

$$O(S)^{++}=\mathrm{ker}[O(S)^{}\mathrm{Aut}(S^{}/S)]$$

and $`\mathrm{Aut}(S^{}/S)`$ is a finite group. We need to show that $`O(S)^{++}O(S)^+`$, that is, if $`\tau O(S)^{++}`$ then $`\tau O(S)^+`$. Since $`\tau {}_{|(S^{}/S)}{}^{}=\mathrm{id}`$, $`(\tau ,\mathrm{id})O(S)\times O(T)`$. This is a Hodge isometry of $`H^2(Z,)`$. Set $`\tau {}_{|H^2(Z,)^W}{}^{}=\sigma `$. Then $`\sigma `$ preserves the Hodge structure and satisfies $`(\sigma (z)\sigma (w))=(zw)`$ for $`z,wH^2(Z,)^W`$. Therefore $`\sigma `$ is a Hodge isometry of $`H^2(Z,)^W`$. Moreover, since $`\tau g^{}=g^{}\tau `$ on $`S`$, and $`\sigma g^{}=g^{}\sigma =g^{}`$ on $`T`$, we have $`\sigma g^{}=g^{}\sigma =\tau `$ on $`H^2(Z,)^W`$. This shows $`\tau O(S)^+`$. ∎

Next we consider the reflection over $`S`$: set

$$N^{}:=\{C=\underset{\mathrm{finite}}{}a_iC_i,\text{ with }a_i_0,|\begin{array}{c}\text{where }C_i\text{ are smooth rational}\hfill \\ \text{curves on }S\text{ with }C^2=2\hfill \end{array}\}$$

and

$$N=\left\{CN^{}\{E_i\}\right|(CE_i)=0\text{ for all }E_i\}.$$

Then every $`CN`$ induces a reflection $`r_C`$ on $`H^2(Z,)^W`$ by $`r_C(D)=D+(DC)C`$. This is a Hodge isometry.

Set $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{im}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}O(S)^+`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is the set of all reflection $`r_C`$ for $`CN`$. For this $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }O(S)^{++}`$ and the cone $`𝒜`$ is a fundamental domain for the action $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`𝒞`$.

Recall the weakly polarized global Torelli theorem:

###### Theorem 2.3 (Morrison \[M2, Section 4\]).

Let $`Y`$ and $`Y^{}`$ be K3 surfaces with weak polarization, and $`\rho :ZY`$, $`\rho ^{}:Z^{}Y^{}`$ their minimal resolutions. Suppose that $`\varphi :H^2(Y,){}_{}{}^{W}H^2(Y^{},)^W^{}`$ is an isometry preserving the Hodge structure such that $`\varphi (𝒜(Y))=𝒜(Y^{})`$, which extends to an isometry $`\psi :H^2(Z,)H^2(Z^{},)`$. Then there is a unique isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }:YY^{}`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}=\varphi `$.

###### Lemma 2.4.

$$\mathrm{\Gamma },P(S)^+=\mathrm{\Gamma }P(S)^+.$$

###### Proof.

To show that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a normal subgroup of $`\mathrm{\Gamma },P(S)^+`$, we check that for each $`\tau P(S)^+`$ and $`CN`$, there exists an element $`C^{}N`$ such that $`\tau ^1r_C\tau (z)=r_C^{}`$. We have $`\tau =f^{}`$ for some $`fQ_Z`$ then we have:

$`\tau ^1r_C\tau (z)`$ $`=(f^1)^{}r_Cf^{}(z)`$
$`=(f^1)^{}(f^{}(z)+f^{}(z)C)C`$
$`=z+(f^{}(z)C)(f^1)^{}(C)`$
$`=z+(z(f^1)^{}C)(f^1)^{}C.`$
In addition, $`(f^1)^{}zN`$ and $`f^{}g^{}=g^{}f^{}`$. Therefore, we may take $`C^{}=(f^1)^{}C`$.

Assume that $`\gamma \tau =\gamma ^{}\tau ^{}`$ for some $`\gamma ,\gamma ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\tau ,\tau ^{}P(S)^+`$. Take $`\gamma ^{\prime \prime }=\gamma \gamma _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Since $`\gamma ^{\prime \prime }(𝒜)=𝒜`$, we have $`\gamma ^{\prime \prime }(𝒜)𝒜\mathrm{}`$. This shows that $`\gamma ^{\prime \prime }=\mathrm{id}`$.

To show that $`\mathrm{\Gamma },P(S)^+\mathrm{\Gamma }P(S)^+`$, we take $`\tau \mathrm{\Gamma },P(S)^+`$, $`y𝒜^{}`$ and set $`\tau (y)=x`$. By Lemma 2.2, (3), there exists $`r_C\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that $`(r_C)^1\tau (y)=(r_C)^1(x)𝒜^{}`$. Since $`S`$ is an even hyperbolic lattice by Lemma 2.2, (1), $`(r_C)^1\tau O(S)^+`$. Then there exists a Hodge isometry $`\rho `$ of $`H^2(Z,)`$ such that $`\rho {}_{|S}{}^{}=(r_C)^1\tau `$ and $`\rho g^{}=g^{}\rho `$ for all $`gG`$. Recall that $`P(S)^+`$ is the image of the homomorphism $`Q_Zff^{}{}_{|S}{}^{}O(S)^{}`$. From Theorem 2.3, there exists $`f\mathrm{Aut}Z`$ such that $`f=\rho `$. Moreover $`fg=gf`$ for all $`gG`$ by Theorem 2.3 again. Hence $`fQ_Z`$ and $`f^{}{}_{|S}{}^{}=(r_C)^1P(S)^+`$. Clearly, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }P(S)\mathrm{\Gamma },P(S)^+`$. So we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma },P(S)^+=\mathrm{\Gamma }P(S)^+`$. Then we get the result. ∎

###### Proposition 2.5.

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a normal subgroup of $`O(S)^+`$ and

$$O(S)^+=\mathrm{\Gamma }P(S)^+.$$

###### Proof.

To prove the first part of the statement, we have only to do with the same line of Lemma 2.4.

It is clear that $`\mathrm{\Gamma },P(S)^+O(S)^+`$. To show $`\mathrm{\Gamma },P(S)^+O(S)^+`$, take the element $`(\tau ,\mathrm{id})O(S)\times O(T)`$ corresponds to the element of $`O(H^2(Z,))`$ and this leads to an element of $`O(H^2(Z,){}_{}{}^{W})`$ by taking restriction. So, applying Theorem 2.3 for the pairs $`(Y,y)`$ and $`(Y,(r_C)\tau (y))`$, we have the element of $`\mathrm{Aut}Z`$ which comes from the element of $`\mathrm{Aut}Y`$. Then we conclude that $`O(S)^+=\mathrm{\Gamma }P(S)^+`$ by Lemma 2.4. ∎

#### Proof of Theorem 2.1

Recall that $`O(S)^+`$ has finite index in $`O(S)^{}`$ by Lemma 2.2, (2). Then by \[AMRT, Chap. II, p. 116–117\], there exist a fundamental domain $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ such that $`𝒞=O(S)^+\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$. Changing $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ such as $`(\mathrm{\Delta }^{})^{}𝒜^{}\mathrm{}`$, we may take $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ to be a subset of $`𝒜`$. (Otherwise, there exists $`bN`$ such that $`H_b=\{xS_{}|(xb)=0\}`$ which satisfies $`(\mathrm{\Delta })^{}H_b0`$. However, since $`r_b(y)=y`$ for $`y(\mathrm{\Delta })^{}H_b`$, we would then have $`r_b((\mathrm{\Delta })^{})0`$. This is a contradiction.)

By Theorem 2.5, $`P(S)^+𝒜=𝒜`$, and $`𝒞=\mathrm{\Gamma }𝒜`$, we find that $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is the required fundamental domain.


format: text

text:
# BeppoSAX spectroscopy of the luminous X-ray sources in M33

## 1 Introduction

M33 (NGC 598) is one of the nearest galaxies (795 kpc, van den Bergh vdb:91 (1991)) and is classified as a late-type Sc spiral. As well as containing several point X-ray sources, M33 is unique amongst the Local Group in having a very bright ($``$1039 erg s-1) X-ray source (X-8) located at a position consistent (to within the positional error of the Einstein High Resolution Imager (HRI) of 3′′) with the optical nucleus of the galaxy (see Long et al. l:81 (1981); Markert & Rallis m:83 (1983); Gottwald et al. g:87 (1987); Trinchieri et al. t:88 (1988); Dubus et al. d:97 (1997)). This source dominates the X-ray flux from the galaxy, being responsible for $``$70% of the 0.15–4.5 keV emission. Another X-ray source in M33 (X-7) is an eclipsing X-ray binary pulsar (Peres et al. p:89 (1989); Schulman et al. s:93 (1993), s:94 (1994); Larson & Schulman ls:97 (1997)) with a 3.45 day orbital period and a 0.31 s pulse period (Dubus et al. d:99 (1999)). The X-ray sources in M33 have been studied by Einstein, EXOSAT, ROSAT, and ASCA, as well as by earlier non-imaging instruments. With an exposure of 50 ks ROSAT Position Sensitive Proportional Counter (PSPC) observations of M33 have detected 35 sources in the central 30 which are brighter than 1036 erg s-1 (Long et al. l:96 (1996); see also Haberl & Pietsch hp:00 (2000)). From an examination of archival ROSAT data spanning over 6 years (a total of 387 ks of HRI time and 62 ks of PSPC time), Dubus et al. (p:97 (1997)) find that the X-ray intensity of M33 X-8 is almost certainly modulated with a period of $`105.9\pm 0.1`$ days.

The nature of M33 X-8 is unclear. X-ray transients such as Aql X-1 and 4U-1630-47 show outbursts on timescales of hundreds of days, but are not periodic (e.g., Kuulkers et al. k:97 (1997)) while a number of persistent X-ray sources exhibit long term periodicities in their X-ray intensities. Extended observations using the All-Sky Monitor (ASM) on the Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (R-XTE) have revealed changes in some long term periodicities (e.g., Paul et al. p:00 (2000)); Wojdowski et al. w:98 (1998); Kong et al. k:98 (1998)). The detection of a 106 day periodicity over $``$20 cycles implies a regularity and duty cycle incompatible with typical soft X-ray transients. M33 X-8 may instead be a moderate mass black hole. Until recently, the M33 nuclear source was frequently considered (as are many of the bright sources in normal galaxies that exceed the Eddington limit of $``$1038 erg s-1 for a 1M compact object) to be a “mini-” (or perhaps “micro-”) active galactic nucleus (AGN). However, the X-ray spectrum of X-8 appears to be much steeper than a classical AGN power-law and can be well fit by a multi-color disk blackbody model plus a harder power-law (Takano et al. t:94 (1994)). This spectral shape is characteristic of the galactic black hole candidates which is often ultra-soft at low-energies and ultra-hard at high-energies. The ultra-soft component may originate from an optically thick accretion disk, while the ultra-hard component may result from comptonization of soft photons by hot electrons (Sunyaev & Trümper s:79 (1979)). The accretion disk model is parameterized by only two quantities, the projected inner disk radius, $`\mathrm{r}_{\mathrm{in}}(\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{i})^{0.5}`$, and the temperature at this inner radius, $`\mathrm{kT}_{\mathrm{in}}`$ (Mitsuda et al. m:84 (1984); Makishima et al. m:86 (1986)). Using ASCA, Takano et al. (t:94 (1994)) obtain a value for $`\mathrm{r}_{\mathrm{in}}(\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{i})^{0.5}`$ of $``$50 km, typical of black hole candidates in their high state. At the distance of M33, this corresponds to a black hole mass of $``$10 M.

In this paper we report on BeppoSAX observations of M33 primarily designed to investigate any spectral changes associated with the 105.9 day cycle of M33 X-8 (Sect. 3) as well as the spectral and temporal properties of the luminous X-ray sources in M33 (Sect. 4).

## 2 Observations

Data from the coaligned Low-Energy Concentrator Spectrometer (LECS; 0.1–10 keV; Parmar et al. p:97 (1997)), Medium-Energy Concentrator Spectrometer (MECS; 1.8–10 keV; Boella et al. b:97 (1997)), and the Phoswich Detection System (PDS; 15–300 keV; Frontera et al. f:97 (1997)) on-board BeppoSAX are presented. The MECS consists of two identical grazing incidence telescopes with imaging gas scintillation proportional counters in their focal planes. The LECS uses an identical concentrator system as the MECS, but utilizes an ultra-thin entrance window and a driftless configuration to extend the low-energy response to 0.1 keV. The fields of view (FOV) of the LECS and MECS are circular with diameters of 37 and 56, respectively. The MECS has a 2 thick circular window support structure which is centered 10 from the FOV center. In addition, four 2 thick radial spokes extend outwards from the circular support. The non-imaging PDS consists of four independent units arranged in pairs each having a separate collimator. Each collimator was alternatively rocked on- and 210 off-source every 96 s during the observations.

M33 was observed 3 times by BeppoSAX (see Table 1). The observing times were chosen in order to study M33 X-8 near the maximum and minimum of the 105.9 day X-ray cycle. The maxima occur at MJD = 48750.3 + n 105.9, and the minima approximately 0.7 in phase later (Dubus et al. d:97 (1997)). The 1998 August observation was close to the 105.9 day minimum ($`\mathrm{\Phi }=0.72`$), and the 1999 January observation close to the maximum ($`\mathrm{\Phi }=0.98`$). However, this observation was curtailed due to technical problems and repeated in 2000 July at $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0.20`$, still close to the expected maximum of the 105.9 day cycle. Good data were selected from intervals when the elevation angle above the Earth’s limb was $`>`$$`5^{}`$ and when the instrument configurations were nominal, using the SAXDAS 2.0.0 data analysis package.

Fig. 1 shows the MECS 1.8–10 keV image obtained by summing data from all 3 observations. The total exposure is 98.3 ks. For clarity, the data have been rebinned by a factor 2 into 16′′ pixels. No corrections for vignetting or obscuration by the MECS window support structure (see above) have been applied. As well as the central M33 X-8 source which dominates the overall X-ray flux, M33 X-4, X-5, X-6, X-7, X-9 and X-10 are clearly detected. The luminous source M33 X-3 is strongly obscured by the MECS strongback and was not detected. In addition, the source identified here as M33 X-9 is resolved into 3 sources in ROSAT and Einstein observations (Long et al. l:96 (1996); Peres et al. p:89 (1989)).

## 3 M33 X-8 analysis

LECS and MECS data were extracted centered on the position of M33 X-8 using radii of 6 and 4, respectively. This LECS extraction radius is smaller than normally used in order to minimize the contribution from nearby sources. The cosmic and internal instrument backgrounds are $``$5% of the source flux, and so background subtraction is not critical and was performed using source free regions of sky. Table 1 gives the 0.1–2.0 keV (LECS) and 2.0–10 keV (MECS) count rates for each observation.

The M33 X-8 spectra were investigated by simultaneously fitting data from the LECS and MECS instruments. All spectra were rebinned to oversample the full width half maximum of the energy resolution by a factor 3 and to have additionally a minimum of 20 counts per bin to allow use of the $`\chi ^2`$ statistic. Data were selected in the energy ranges 0.2–8.0 keV (LECS) and 1.8–10 keV (MECS) where the instrument responses are well determined and sufficient counts obtained. The photoelectric absorption cross sections of Morrison & McCammon (mc:83 (1983)) are used throughout. Factors were included in the spectral fitting to allow for normalization uncertainties between the two instruments.

### 3.1 1998 August spectrum

Initially, simple models were tried, including absorbed power-law, thermal bremsstrahlung and cutoff power-law ($`\mathrm{E}^\alpha \mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{E}_{\mathrm{co}}/\mathrm{kT})`$) models. The power-law and bremsstrahlung models give unacceptable fits with $`\chi ^2`$ of 380.8 and 149.8 for 101 degrees of freedom (dof), respectively. The cutoff power-law model fit is acceptable with a $`\chi ^2`$ of 118.1 for 100 dof. Next, more complex models consisting of a power-law and a blackbody and a power-law and a disk-blackbody were fit. These both give acceptable fits with $`\chi ^2`$s of 106.0 and 108.9 for 99 dof, respectively. The best-fit inner disk radius is $`55.2\pm _{5.7}^{7.6}`$ km for a distance of 795 kpc and a disk inclination of 0. The fit results are summarized in Table 4. The absorption corrected 1.0–10 keV source luminosity is $`1.3\times 10^{39}`$ erg s-1 for a distance of 795 kpc.

### 3.2 2000 July spectrum

The spectra were created in the same way as for the 1998 August observation and the same spectral models applied. The results are given in Table 4. The exposure times for this observation are shorter than for the 1988 August observation, and the spectrum can be successfully modeled using either bremsstrahlung, cutoff power-law, power-law and blackbody or power-law and disk-blackbody models. The derived spectral parameters are consistent with those from the earlier observation with an inner disk radius of $`50.0\pm _{22.6}^{13.2}`$ km for the same assumptions as above. The absorption corrected 1.0–10 keV source luminosity is $`1.2\times 10^{39}`$ erg s-1 for a distance of 795 kpc.

### 3.3 Combined spectrum

Since the spectral fit parameters derived from the fits to the 1998 August and 2000 July data are consistent, these data were combined to produce a “summed” spectrum. Data from the short (MECS exposure of 1.1 ks) observation in 1999 January were also included. The same spectral models as above were fit and the results summarized in Table 4. As found by Takano et al. (t:94 (1994)), the best-fit model is the power-law and disk-blackbody combination with a $`\mathrm{kT}_{\mathrm{in}}`$ of $`1.10\pm 0.05`$ keV and an inner radius of $`55.4\pm _{7.7}^{6.0}`$ km for a distance of 795 kpc and a disk inclination angle of 0. The mean, absorption corrected, 1.0–10 keV luminosity of M33 X-8 is $`1.25\times 10^{39}`$ erg s-1 for a distance of 795 kpc. The 90% confidence upper limit to a narrow emission line at 6.5 keV is 100 eV.

The galactic absorption in the direction of M33 X-8 is $`5.6\times 10^{20}`$ atom cm-2 (Dickey & Lockman d:90 (1990)). Using the power-law and disk-blackbody model, the best fit absorption of $`(1.2\pm _{0.6}^{1.0})\times 10^{21}`$ atom cm-2 suggests the presence of a small amount of additional absorption. The 3$`\sigma `$ upper-limit to any PDS counts in the 15–40 keV band is 0.06 s-1, consistent with the extrapolation of the best-fit power-law and disk-blackbody spectrum to this energy range which gives 0.02 count s-1. For a power-law spectrum with $`\alpha =2.1`$ the upper-limit corresponds to a flux of $`<`$0.4 mCrab.

### 3.4 Time Variability

Fig. 3 shows 2–10 keV MECS lightcurves of M33 X-8 during 1998 August and 2000 July observations with a binning time of 1024 s. The LECS and MECS data from these observations were searched for the presence of periodic signals. None were found. During the 1998 August observation the 3$`\sigma `$ limit to any 2–10 keV (MECS) root mean square variability is $`<`$7.6% when evaluated on a timescale of 3000 s. In the energy band 0.1–2.0 keV (LECS) the upper limit evaluated in the same way is $`<`$5.3%. For the 2000 July observation the corresponding upper limits are $`<`$25% and $`<`$29%.

The mean ROSAT HRI count rate is 0.20 s-1 and the modulation appears sinusoidal-like with an amplitude of $``$20%. The folded 0.1–2.5 keV ROSAT lightcurve (see Fig. 4 and Fig. 3 of Dubus et al. d:97 (1997)) has a mean count rate of 0.20 s-1 with a sinusoidal-like modulation superposed with an amplitude of $``$20%. This implies that the count rates of the 1999 January and 2000 July observations should be $``$40% higher than that of 1998 August, should the 105.9 day modulation be present. However, the MECS 2.0–10.0 keV count rate at $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0.72`$ (close to the expected minimum of the cycle) is higher than at the expected maximum. In order to compare our BeppoSAX results for the two long observations with those of Dubus et al. (d:97 (1997)), we folded the best-fit BeppoSAX power-law and disk-blackbody models (see Table 4) through the HRI on-axis response matrix obtained from the HEASARC. This gives predicted HRI count rates of $`0.221\pm 0.007`$ s-1 and $`0.195\pm 0.012`$ s-1 for the 1998 August and 2000 July observations, respectively. These points are shown together with the HRI results of Dubus et al. (d:97 (1997)) on Fig. 4. The derived count rates do not support the continued presence of the 105.9 day modulation, although we cannot entirely exclude the possibility that the modulation is being masked by a higher than usual level of intrinsic variability.

## 4 Point sources

In order to investigate the properties of the other sources identified in Fig. 1 MECS data from all 3 observations were used. Except for M33 X-6 LECS data were not used since there were too few counts present. During the 1998 August observation M33 X-4 was partially obscured by a MECS strongback radial spoke (see Sect. 4.2) and these data were excluded from the analysis. For all the other sources no obscuration problems were present. Spectra were extracted centered on each source using the extraction radii listed in Table 3 and 2 in the case of the LECS M33 X-6 data. These radii were chosen to minimize contamination from nearby sources and take into account the position of the MECS window support strongback. The spectra were rebinned in the same way as in Sect. 2 and data selected in the energy ranges where sufficient counts were obtained. Since these sources are all faint by BeppoSAX standards care was taken to reliably estimate the background. In order to properly take into account all the possible contaminating contributions, especially from the bright nuclear source M33 X-8, local backgrounds, each extracted from the same off-axis angle as the corresponding source, but at the geometrically opposite position in the FOV, were used. This is also necessary because the MECS instrument background has a component due to Mn K$`\alpha `$ calibration source X-rays which are detected within the FOV. This effect is most noticeable close to the calibration sources and in particular for M33 X-9. A comparison of these local backgrounds with the average properties of background taken from high latitude pointings reveals that no strong evidence for diffuse emission is present in the MECS M33 data. A higher local background ($``$20%) is present around M33 X-8, but this is consistent with being due to the X-ray mirror scattering wings.

Instrument response files appropriate to the off-axis positions of each source were used, except for M33 X-5 and X-7, which are close enough to the on-axis position to use the standard response files.

### 4.1 Spectral fit results

Absorbed power-law and bremsstrahlung models were first fit to each of the spectra and the results presented in Table LABEL:tab:pointspectra. Fits were repeated with the absorption constrained to be greater than, and equal to, the galactic value for each source. With the exception of M33 X-6 (and possibly M33 X-10) these models give reasonable fits to all the spectra and it is not possible to exclude either model. In the case of M33 X-6, the best-fit absorbed power-law and bremsstrahlung models give $`\chi ^2`$’s of 51.7 and 44.2 for 28 dof, respectively. The best-fit to the M33 X-6 spectrum is instead obtained with an absorbed disk-blackbody model with $`\mathrm{kT}_{\mathrm{in}}=1.7\pm 0.2`$ keV and a normalization ($`\mathrm{r}_{\mathrm{in}}(\mathrm{cosi})^{0.5}`$) of $`7\pm 2`$ km. The 90% confidence upper limit to a narrow emission line at 6.5 keV from M33 X-6 is 540 eV. In the case of M33 X-10, a broad feature appears to be present at $``$4 keV. This can be modeled by the addition of a ($`\sigma =200`$ eV) Gaussian line to the best-fit power-law to give a $`\chi ^2`$ of 18.6 for 15 dof. The line energy is $`4.2\pm _{0.2}^{0.3}`$ keV and the equivalent width 440 eV.

Table LABEL:tab:pointspectra includes estimates of the source luminosities extrapolated (when necessary) to the 2–10 keV energy range. Photon spectra, deconvolved using the best-fit power-law models are shown in Fig. 5, except for M33 X-6 where the best-fit disk-blackbody model is used. With the exception of M33 X-9 and X-10, all the sources appear to be relatively soft in the 2–10 keV energy range.

### 4.2 Time variability

In order to investigate if any of the point sources exhibit excess variability, a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test as implemented in the FTOOLs package lcstat was performed on each of the lightcurves presented in Figs. 6 and 7. The sources M33 X-4, X-5, and X-10 show some evidence for excess variability on time scales $`>`$1024 s with probabilities for being constant of 4.8%, 4.4%, and 5.4% for M33 X-4, (obs. 1), X-5 (obs. 3), and X-10 (obs. 1), respectively. The other 3 sources do not show evidence for variability during either long observation with probabilities for being constant of 32% (X-6, obs. 1), 61% (X-7, obs. 1, $`>`$2048 s), and 19% (X-9, obs. 3). For comparison, data from source free regions of the image were also extracted and processed in the same way. No evidence for any excess variability was found.

A comparison between the 1998 August (Fig. 6), and 2000 July (Fig. 7) observations, does not show evidence for variability, except for M33 X-4, which showed a factor of $``$2 difference in count rate between the two observations. However, this change is almost certainly due to obscuration by one of the radial spokes of the MECS strongback during the 1998 August observation. The 2000 July observation was made at a different spacecraft roll angle, resulting in the source being well clear of the strongback. The BeppoSAX data are therefore consistent with the association of M33 X-4 with the supernova remnant SNR 136+396 discussed in Long et al. (l:96 (1996)).

Table 6 gives a comparison of the BeppoSAX source intensities with those derived from previous ROSAT PSPC (Long et al. l:96 (1996)) and $`Einstein`$ IPC observations (Peres et al. p:89 (1989). For M33 X-4 only the data from the 2000 July observation is used. Unfortunately, due to the lack of good estimates of the absorbing column to most of the sources (see Table LABEL:tab:pointspectra), it is difficult to reliably extrapolate the BeppoSAX spectra to the PSPC (0.1–2.4 keV) and IPC (0.2–4.5 keV) energy ranges. Instead, we have adopted the spectral model assumed by Long et al. (l:96 (1996)) to convert ROSAT PSPC counts to fluxes. This consists of a power-law with $`\alpha =2`$ and absorption of $`10^{21}`$ atom cm-2. We note that none of the spectral fits reported in Table LABEL:tab:pointspectra are in strong disagreement with such a model. We estimate that the uncertainty in the BeppoSAX fluxes is $``$40%, primarily due to uncertainties in instrumental calibration at large off-axis angles.

Examination of Table 6 shows that M33 X-4, X-6 ($`Einstein`$ only), X-7, X-9 and X-10 (ROSAT only) show $`>`$40% variability with respect to both the $`Einstein`$ and ROSAT measurements. The source M33 X-7 shows the strongest evidence for variability being a factor $``$3 fainter during the BeppoSAX observations than previously observed. Since this source exhibits 0.33 day duration eclipses, we verified that the observations were not at the expected times of eclipse using the ephemeris of Larson & Schulman (ls:97 (1997)). Source X-9, not resolved in the MECS image, appears to be variable being a factor $``$2.5 brighter during the BeppoSAX observation than previously, if the ROSAT fluxes of the three separate sources are summed together (the X-9(c) flux is not reported in Long et al. l:96 (1996), although it is visible in their figure and appears to be as bright as the other two sources). Since the level of variability of M33 X-4, X-6, and X-10 is comparable with the (hard to quantify) systematic uncertainties, we regard the detection of variability for these sources as tentative.

Since M33 X-4 may be associated with a SNR, it is interesting to compare BeppoSAX fluxes with those obtained using $`Einstein`$ and ROSAT using a bremsstrahlung model. If $`\mathrm{N}_\mathrm{H}`$ is again fixed at $`10^{21}`$ atom cm-2, we obtain kT=2.4 keV for the MECS spectrum and 0.1–2.4 keV and 0.2–4.5 keV luminosities of 1.1$`\times 10^{38}`$ ergs s-1 and 1.5$`\times 10^{38}`$ ergs s-1, respectively. These values should be compared with 9.5$`\times 10^{37}`$ ergs s-1 ($`Einstein`$ IPC, 0.2–4.5 keV) and 8.3$`\times 10^{37}`$ ergs s-1 (ROSAT, 0.1–2.4 keV), derived using this same spectral shape. Thus, there is no strong evidence for flux variability from M33 X-4.

## 5 Discussion

The nearby galaxy M33 was observed by the imaging X-ray instruments on-board BeppoSAX. As well as the central M33 X-8 source which dominates the overall X-ray flux, M33 X-4, X-5, X-6, X-7, X-9 and X-10 were clearly detected. Observations close to the expected maximum and minimum of the 105.9 day intensity cycle of M33 X-8 failed to reveal the expected modulation, suggesting that it is probably transitory. No obvious spectral differences between the observations are present. The 0.2–10 keV spectrum of M33 X-8 can best be modeled by an absorbed power-law with $`\alpha =1.89\pm _{0.79}^{0.40}`$ and a disk-blackbody with kT $`=1.10\pm 0.05`$ keV and a projected inner-disk radius of $`55.4\pm _{7.7}^{6.0}`$ km. This spectral shape is in good agreement with the ASCA results of Takano et al. (t:94 (1994)) and corresponds to a black hole mass of $``$10 M.

The nature of M33 X-8 is intriguing. X-ray transients such as Aql X-1 and 4U 1630-47 show outbursts on timescales of hundreds of days, but are not periodic (e.g., Kuulkers et al. k:97 (1997)). A number of persistent X-ray sources exhibit long term periodicities in their X-ray intensities. Perhaps the best known of these are the pulsars Her X-1 (35 days, Giacconi et al. g:73 (1973)), LMC X-4 (30.5 days, Lang et al. l:81a (1981)) and SMC X-1 (60 days, Wojdowski et al. w:98 (1998)). In addition, the high-mass X-ray binary SS 433 thought to contain a black hole exhibits a 164 day photometric and spectroscopic modulation in the optical band (Margon et al. m:79 (1979)). Two other black hole candidates, Cyg X-1 (300 days, Priedhorsky et al. p:83 (1983) and LMC X-3, (198 or 99 days, Cowley et al. c:91 (1991)) also exhibit long term X-ray modulations. Thus, the presence of a 105.9 day X-ray intensity modulation from M33 X-8 is not particularly unusual if the source does indeed contain a $``$10 M black hole.

Recently, extended observations using the ASM on R-XTE have revealed that in at least four sources (Cyg X-3, LMC X-3, SMC X-1, and GX 354-0; Paul et al. p:00 (2000); Wojdowski et al. w:98 (1998); Kong et al. k:98 (1998)) the long term modulations have disappeared, or changed periods. Such unstable behavior is difficult to reconcile with the preferred model for the modulations in the high-mass sources which is obscuration by a precessing accretion disk (see e.g., Priedhorsky & Holt ph:87 (1987)). Since the detection of changes in the properties of these long term variations requires very long observing baselines, it is possible that such unstable behavior is relatively common in accreting systems. Thus, the probable cessation of the 105.9 day periodicity reported here strengthens somewhat the idea that M33 X-8 consists of a black hole accreting from a binary companion.

The 2–10 keV spectra of M33 X-4, X-5, X-7, X-9 and X-10 are all consistent with power-law or bremsstrahlung models, whilst that of X-6 appears to be significantly more complex, and may be reasonably well modeled with a disk-blackbody with kT = $`1.7\pm 0.2`$ keV and a projected inner-disk radius of $`7\pm 2`$ km. This normalization is in good agreement with the average of a number of low-mass X-ray binary systems known to contain neutron stars ($``$7 km), but is smaller than the average ($``$25 km) for black hole candidates (e.g., Tanaka & Lewin (tl:95 (1995)). This suggests that M33 X-6 may be a neutron star accreting from a low-mass companion. The spectrum of M33 X-9 is quite hard with $`\alpha =1.3`$, similar to the hard/low state in galactic black hole candidates. A comparison with earlier $`Einstein`$ and ROSAT results implies that M 33 X-7 and X-9 are variable on long timescales, M33 X-4, X-6 and X-10 may be variable, whilst X-5 does not show evidence for any such variability. We cannot exclude the association of M33 X-4 with the supernova remnant SNR 136+396 discussed in Long et al. (l:96 (1996)). The lack of variability, moderate luminosity ($`3\times 10^{37}`$ erg s-1), and simple (consistent with a power-law or bremsstrahlung) spectrum may indicate that M33 X-5 is a young X-ray bright supernova remnant. M33 X-6 clearly has an unusual spectrum and is worthy of further study with more sensitive instruments. It is unsurprising that M33 X-7 shows strong long term variability since it is known to be an (eclipsing) X-ray binary system (Peres et al. p:89 (1989)). Whilst M33 X-9 was a factor $``$2.5 brighter during the BeppoSAX observations than previously observed, it is unclear which (if any) of the 3 sources that apparently comprise X-9 had become significantly brighter.

###### Acknowledgements.

The BeppoSAX satellite is a joint Italian-Dutch programme. L. Sidoli acknowledges an ESA Research Fellowship. We thank the staff of the BeppoSAX Science Data Center for help with scheduling these observations and M. Corcoran for assistance with the ROSAT analysis. The referee, H.L. Marshall, is thanked for helpful comments.


text:
# Untitled Document

SUPERCONVERGENCE AND DUALITY. Superconvergence of the gauge field propagator leads to general arguments for the absence of transverse gauge field excitations from the physical state space of the theory. These arguments are valid for SUSY and for non-SUSY theories. The presence of superconvergence relations depends upon the gauge group and the the number and typ of matter fields. Duality is another important concept which makes statements about the phase structure of SUSY gauge theories. For SUSY theories of interest, these quite different methods give exactly the same results.

It is reasonable to consider $`N=1`$ SUSY theories with the gauge group $`SU(N_C)`$ and $`N_F`$ massless quark fields in the fundamental representation. Generalizations will be discussed later. In the Landau gauge, and for appropriate values of $`N_F`$, there exists the SUPERCONVERGENCE RELATION

$`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑k^2\rho (k^2,\kappa ^2,g)=0,`$ (1)
where $`\kappa ^2<0`$ is the normalization point. The integrand $`\rho `$ is the discontinuity of the structure function for the transverse gauge field propagator. It represents the norm of the states $`\stackrel{~}{A}^{\mu \nu }(k)|0`$, where $`A^{\mu \nu }=^\mu A^\nu ^\nu A^\nu `$, and $`A^\nu `$ is the component gauge field of the corresponding superfield. Explicitely,

$`0|\stackrel{~}{A}_a^{\mu \nu }(k^{})\stackrel{~}{A}_b^{\varrho \sigma }(k)|0=\delta _{ab}\theta (k^0)\delta (k^{}k)\pi \rho (k^2)`$ (2)
$`\times (2)(2\pi )^4\left(k^\mu k^\varrho g^{\nu \sigma }k^\mu k^\sigma g^{\nu \varrho }+k^\nu k^\sigma g^{\mu \varrho }k^\nu k^\varrho g^{\mu \sigma }\right).`$ (3)
With test functions $`C_{\mu \nu }^a(k)`$, one can form states

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(C)=d^4kC_{\mu \nu }^a(k)\stackrel{~}{A}_a^{\mu \nu }(k)|0`$, and obtain the norm

$`(\mathrm{\Psi }(C),\mathrm{\Psi }(C))`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^4k\theta (k^0)\pi \rho (k^2)C(k)},`$ (4)
$`C(k)`$ $`=`$ $`8(2\pi )^4k^\mu \overline{C}_{\mu \nu }^a(k)k^\rho C_{\rho \sigma }^ag^{\nu \sigma },`$ (5)
where $`C(k)>0`$ for $`k^20,k^00`$. For positive values of the gauge parameter $`\alpha `$, there is constant term $`\alpha /\alpha _0`$ on the righthand side of Eq.(1), where $`\alpha _0=\gamma _{00}/\gamma _{01}`$. Here $`\gamma (g^2,\alpha )=(\gamma _{00}+\alpha \gamma _{01})g^2+\mathrm{}`$ is the anomalous dimension of the gauge field. But for the problem of phase transitions, it is sufficient to work in the Landau gauge.

For values of $`N_F`$ and $`N_C`$ for which the superconvergence relation is valid, one can show that the transverse gauge field quanta must be confined in the sense that they are not elements of the physical state space of the theory. The physical state space is defined in terms of a BRST cohomology, and is invariant under Poincaré and equivalence transformations. In the space with indefinite metric, it requires a detailed analysis of the states $`\stackrel{~}{A}^{\mu \nu }(k)|0`$ in order to proof this fact. One uses invariant projections into the subspace of positive energy states, and proceeds to isolate the subset of physical states. A complete discussion may be found in . There are no superconvergence relations for the quark propagator. But for the typ of theories considered, the absence of all gluon states from the physical subspace should also imply the absence of quark states associated with the same gauge group .

The values of $`N_F`$, for which the superconvergence relation (1) is valid, are obtained from the leading asymptotic term of the gauge field structure function $`D(k^2,\kappa ^2,g)`$ for $`k^20`$ in all directions of the complex plane. This term is given by

$`k^2D(k^2,\kappa ^2,g)`$ $``$ $`C(g^2)\left(\beta _0\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{\kappa ^2}}\right)^{\gamma _{00}/\beta _0}+\mathrm{}.`$ (6)
The essential aspect of Eq.(4) is the exponent $`(\gamma _{00}/\beta _0)`$, where $`\beta _0`$ is the coefficient in the $`\beta `$-function $`\beta (g^2)=\beta _0g^4+\mathrm{}`$, and $`\gamma _{00}`$ has been defined before. (This exponent is actually the same for all gauges $`\alpha 0`$). It is assumed that $`\beta _0<0`$ corresponding to asymptotic freedom. Under these circumstances, the superconvergence relation (1) is valid for $`\gamma _{00}/\beta _0>0`$. With the coefficients given by

$`\beta _0`$ $`=`$ $`(16\pi ^2)^1(3N_C+N_F)`$ (7)
$`\gamma _{00}`$ $`=`$ $`(16\pi ^2)^1({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}N_C+N_F),`$ (8)
this condition corresponds to $`N_F<\frac{3}{2}N_C`$ . For values of $`N_F`$ below the point $`N_F=\frac{3}{2}N_C`$, there is confinement of the gauge quanta associated with the group $`SU(N_C)`$ as described above. Above this point, there is the interval

$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}N_C<N_F<3N_C,`$ (9)
where the theory still has asymptotic freedom, but there is no constraint on transverse gauge excitations. A detailed study of the dispersion representations for the propagator and for projected propagators indicates that no confinement is expected in this region .

The results described above show that the zero point of the anomalous dimension coefficient $`\gamma _{00}(N_F)`$ is as important for the phase structure of the theory as is that of the coefficient $`\beta _0(N_F)`$. Both coefficients are invariant under equivalence transformations of the theory, and hence scheme independent. Although fields without mass terms are considered here, if masses of matter fields are present, one can arrange for mass independent coefficients.

The consequences of superconvergence, which are reported above for $`N=1`$ supersymetric theories, were first obtained for non-SUSY theories in , and then for the SUSY case in , where the phase change at $`N_F=3/2N_C`$ is pointed out explicitely. In the $`SU(N_C)`$ gauge theory without supersymmetry, the interval corresponding to Eq. (6) is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{13}{4}}N_C<N_F<{\displaystyle \frac{22}{4}}N_C.`$ (10)
For $`N_F<\frac{13}{4}N_C`$, the superconvergence relation is valid, and hence transverse gauge field quanta are confined in the sense that they are not in the physical state space. One may expect that the known perturbative zero $`g_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$ of the renormalization group function $`\beta (g^2)`$, at the upper end of the interval (6) or (7) respectively, actually corresponds to a general non-pertubative infrared fixed point in the corresponding window .

It is very interesting to compare the phase structure obtained from superconvergence with the results following from electric-magnetic DUALITY of $`N=1`$ SUSY gauge theories . As above, the electric theory is considered to have the gauge group $`G=SU(N_C)`$ and massles matter fields in the representation $`N_F\times (𝐍_𝐂+\overline{𝐍}_𝐂)`$. It is proposed that there exists a dual magnetic theory which provides an equivalent description in the infrared. For appropriate values of $`N_C`$ and $`N_F`$, it has the gauge group $`G^d=SU(N_C^d)`$ with $`N_C^d=N_FN_C`$. There are $`N_F^d=N_F`$ quark superfields $`q`$ in the fundamental representation, the corresponding anti-quark superfields $`\overline{q}`$, and $`N_F^2`$ independent scalar superfields $`M`$, which are coupled via a Yukawa superpotential of the form $`\sqrt{\lambda }M_j^iq_i\overline{q}^j`$. This coupling is required by the anomaly matching conditions, which are used in the construction of dual theories. In the conformal window, the potential drives the magnetic theory to a fixed point which is the same as the one for the electric theory.

In order to have a dual magnetic theory with a single coupling parameter, one can use the method of the REDUCTION OF COUPLINGS, which is a consequence of the renormalization group equations . For the dual magnetic theory discussed here, the reduction equations have a unique solution with an asymptotic power series expansion. This solution expresses the Yukawa coupling $`\lambda `$ in terms of the magnetic gauge coupling: $`\lambda (g_{d}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})=f_0(N_F,N_C)g_{d}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$, where the coefficient $`f_0`$ is give explicitly.

In the reduced, as well as in the two-coupling form of the magnetic theory, there is no contribution from the superpotential to the one-loop coefficients $`\beta _0^d`$ of the $`\beta ^d`$ function and $`\gamma _{00}^d`$ of the anomalous dimension $`\gamma ^d`$ for the magnetic gauge field. These coefficients are given by

$`\beta _0^d`$ $`=`$ $`(16\pi ^2)^1(2N_F+3N_C)`$ (11)
$`\gamma _{00}^d`$ $`=`$ $`(16\pi ^2)^1({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}N_F+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}N_C),`$ (12)
where $`N_F^d=N_F`$ has been used in order to evaluate both theories at the same number of flavors. However, here these flavors refer to the magnetic gauge group $`G^d=SU(N_C^d)`$.

Comparing the coefficients for the magnetic theory with those for the corresponding electric theory as given in eq.(5), there emerge the DUALITY RELATIONS

$`2\gamma _{00}(N_F)`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _0^d(N_F),`$ (13)
$`2\gamma _{00}^d(N_F)`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _0(N_F),`$ (14)
with $`N_F`$ on both sides again referring to the different gauge groups. The factor two is due to the definition of the anomalous dimension used. These duality relations explicitly verify the result obtained from superconvergence, namely that the anomalous dimension coefficient $`\gamma _{00}(N_F)`$ is of direct importance for the phase structure. With the opposite sign, it exactly coincides with the $`\beta `$ function coefficient of the dual magnetic theory. The superconvergence arguments imply that, as a consequence of the change of sign of $`\gamma _{00}(N_F)`$, the electric theory is in a different phase for $`N_F<\frac{3}{2}N_C`$ than inside the window (6). With duality, the magnetic description changes from asymptotic freedom inside the window to infrared freedom for $`N_F<\frac{3}{2}N_C`$. Below the zero of $`\beta _0^d(N_F)`$, the excitations associated with the magnetic gauge group $`SU(N_FN_C)`$ describe the spectrum for $`N_F>N_C+1`$, assuming $`N_C>4`$. They may be considered as composites of the confined electric quanta. Near $`N_F=3N_C`$, the upper end of the window, the rôles of electric and magnetic theories are interchanged . With $`\gamma _{00}^d/\beta _0^d>0`$ and asymptotic freedom, the superconvergence argument implies that for $`N_F>3N_C`$ the magnetic gauge quanta are not in the physical state space of the magnetic theory. The infrared free electric quanta describe the spectrum at low energies, assuming some embedding of the electric theory at small distances, for instance into a string theory. It should be mentioned that the lower limit of the conformal window follows also from the superconformal algebra, given the presence of the non-trivial fixed point.

The duality relations (9) can be shown to be valid for SUSY theories with other gauge groups, and matter fields in the fundamental representation. For example, electric theories with the groups $`SO(N_C),Sp(2N_C),G_2`$ and the corresponding dual magnetic theories with $`SO(N_FN_C+4),Sp(2N_C2N_C4),SU(N_F4)`$ have been considered. The relations (9) are usually not valid for theories where matter fields in the adjoint representation are present. In order to have matching anomalies in these cases, it turns out that superpotentials are needed for the electric as well as for the magnetic theories . These potentials then dominate the phase structure, and the gauge coupling plays a lesser rôle. Even though the duality relations (9) may not hold, the superconvergence arguments themselves are still of interest. In particular, superconvergence may give some information about phases of these theories without superpotentials, where there is no duality.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

 R. Oehme, W. Zimmermann, Phys. Rev. D21 (1980) 471, 1661; R. Oehme, Phys. Lett. B252 (1990) 641; R. Oehme, W. Xu, Phys. Lett. B333 (1994) 172, hep-th/9406081, B384 (1996) 269, hep-th/9604021..

 R. Oehme, Phys. Rev. D42 (1990) 4209, Phys. Lett. B195 (1987) 60; K. Nishijima, Prog.Theor.Phys. 75 (1986) 1221.

 K. Nishijima, Prog.Theor.Phys.77 (1987) 1053; R. Oehme, Phys. Lett. B232 (1989) 489; T. Kugo, I. Ojima, Prog.Theor.Phys.Suppl. 66 (1979) 1.

 R. Oehme, ‘Superconvergence, Supersymmetry and Conformal Invariance’, in Leite Lopes Festschrift, pp. 443-457, World Scientific 1988, (KEK Library Scan, HEP SPIRES SLAC: Oehme, R.).

 T. Banks, A. Zaks, Nucl. Phys. B196 (1982) 189; E. Gardi, G. Grunberg, JHEP 024 (1999) 9903, hep-th/9810192.

 N. Seiberg, Nucl. Phys. B435 (1995) 129, hep-th/9411149.

 R. Oehme, Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 105004-1, hep-th/9808054, ‘Reduction of Coupling Parameters in Quantum Field Theories’, in Concise Encyclopedia of SUPERSYMMETRY, Kluver 2001, hep-th/0012162, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 86 (1986) 215; R. Oehme, W. Zimmermann, Commun.Math.Phys. 97 (1985) 569; R. Oehme, K. Sibold and W. Zimmermann, Phys. Lett. B147 (1984) 115, Phys. Lett. B153(1985) 142; W. Zimmermann, Commun. Math. Phys. 97 (1985) 211.

 R. Oehme, Phys. Lett. B399 (1997) 67, hep-th/9701012, ‘Superconvergence, Confinement and Duality’, Novy Svit, Crimea, 1995: Proceedings pp. 107-116, Kiev 1995, hep-th/9511014.

 D. Kutasov, A. Schwimmer, Phys.Lett. B354 (1995) 315, hep-th/9505004; M. Tachibana, Phys. Rev. D58 (1998) 045015, hep-th/9709186.

Reinhard Oehme