text:
# The X-ray nebula of the filled center supernova remnant 3C58 and its interaction with the environmentBased on observations obtained with XMM-Newton, an ESA science mission with instruments and contributions directly funded by ESA Member States and the USA (NASA)

## 1 Introduction

3C58 is a beautiful example of a filled-center (or plerionic) supernova remnant (SNR), probably associated with the historical supernova event in 1181 A.D. (Stephenson (1971)). This object has always received much attention because, on the one hand, it shows some characteristics similar to the Crab SNR, while, on the other hand, it seems very different to the Crab itself. For instance, 3C58 has a compact ($`10^{}\times 6^{}`$) elliptical morphology with a very bright core (Reynolds & Aller (1988)) and linear size similar to the Crab; Frail & Moffett (1993) have reported a wisp-like elongated structure at $`2.6^{\prime \prime }`$ from the core, which has been observed also in the Crab and which is probably associated with the pulsar wind termination shock. However, unlike the Crab, there is no clear evidence of a pulsating point source located in the center, as would be expected, since the morphology strongly suggest that the nebula is powered by a spinning neutron star. Despite considerable effort, pulsations have not been detected so far in either radio (see e.g. Lorimer et al. (1998)), nor in X-rays (Helfand et al. (1995), H95 hereafter). Moreover, the X-ray to radio flux ratio ($`f_X/f_r`$) of 3C58 is 100 times lower than that of the Crab (H95), its spectral break occurs at 50 GHz (300 times less than the break of the Crab, Green & Scheuer (1992)) and its radio luminosity is increasing instead of decreasing as expected (Green (1987)). These remarkable differences are also seen in other plerions, and Woltjer et al. (1997) have proposed the introduction of a new sub-class of plerions, the “non Crab-like plerions”, of which 3C58 can be considered the prototype. For these objects, a non-standard evolution of the pulsar can be invoked, but the details are not yet clear.

It is therefore very important to investigate the physical properties which render 3C58 so peculiar, in order to put this object and its sub-class in the right perspective. In particular, the detection or non-detection of the central source is obviously a key point. Becker et al. (1982) reported the presence of a compact X-ray source in 3C58 from their Einstein HRI observation, about 10′′ in extent, and contributing to 15% of the detected X-ray flux. Later, Helfand et al. (1995) revisited the X-ray emission of 3C58 using ROSAT HRI data, confirming the compact source and favored a model in terms of hot polar caps to explain the emission. However, it has not been possible so far to take an X-ray spectrum of the source to study it, and to understand if it is really a point source or an enhancement of the pulsar nebula. Torii et al. (2000) have pointed out that the inclusion of a black-body component in the fit of the ASCA GIS+SIS data of 3C58 yields an improvement of the $`\chi ^2`$. They claim that the best-fit black-body component is responsible for $`7`$% of the unabsorbed flux in the 0.5-10 keV of the whole remnant, and that it is the spectral signature of the central source.

It is also very important to assess the presence of a shell around the pulsar nebula, for it may give compelling constraints on the age of the remnant, the shock velocity and the density of the environment. In the case of the $`800`$ yr old 3C58 (as other plerions as well), it is expected that the main shock will encounter the stellar ejecta and/or the interstellar medium (ISM) giving rise to a limb brightened shell. However, no sign of a shell has been detected at centimeter wavelengths at distances greater than $`5^{}`$ from the core (Reynolds & Aller (1985)). However, Reynolds & Aller (1988) have imaged the faint outer emission of the nebula at a distance between 2 and $`4^{}`$ and have noticed limb brightening at several locations. In this paper, we present a study of the XMM-Newton data of 3C58 obtained during the Calibration and Performance Verification (Cal/PV) phase of the mission. We show that a stringent upper-limit can be imposed on the presence of thermal emission from a central point source, and we also find evidence for a thermal outer shell. The implications of these findings for current models of 3C58 are also discussed.

## 2 Data analysis

### 2.1 Observations

3C58 has been observed as part of the Cal/PV phase of the XMM-Newton satellite (Jansen et al. (2000)). In this paper, we focus on the 25 ks on-axis observation performed during orbit 47, on March 12th 2000. Data from the two MOS (Turner et al. (2000)) cameras and the PN (Strueder et al. (2000)) camera have been used. MOS and PN cameras are CCD arrays which collect X-ray photons between 0.1 and 15 keV and have a field of view of $`30^{}`$. The pixel size is $`1.1^{\prime \prime }`$ and $`4.1^{\prime \prime }`$ for MOS and PN respectively, and this should be compared with the mirror PSF width of $`6{}_{}{}^{\prime \prime }15^{\prime \prime }`$ FWHM–HEW. The data have been acquired with the medium filter and in full image mode, and therefore the temporal resolution is low, 2.5 s and 73 ms for MOS and PN, respectively. The worse spatial resolution of the PN is compensated by its greater sensitivity, on the average 20-30% more than the combined two MOS.

The Standard Analysis System (SAS) software we have used (version 5.0 alpha, xmmsas-20001011-1559) takes care of most of the required events screening. However, we have further screened the data to eliminate some residual hot pixels and occasional background enhancement due to intense flux of soft protons in the magnetosphere. In particular, we have extracted the background light-curve from a region free of sources, and we have identified time intervals of unusually high count rates (more than twice the “quiescent” background rate) and removed them from subsequent analysis. Moreover we have also selected events with value of the PATTERN pipeline assigned keywords between 0 and 12. The exposure time of the screened observations is 16 ks for the MOS and 12 ks for the PN detectors.

### 2.2 X-ray morphology

In Fig. 1, we report the 3C58 profile as seen by the MOS1+2 computed in 65 annuli with $`\mathrm{\Delta }r=4^{\prime \prime }`$ up to a distance of $`4^{}`$ from the centroid, located at $`2^h05^m38.0^s`$ $`+64^d49^m37^s`$ (J2000, $`\pm 1^{\prime \prime }`$). The background was collected from a ring with $`\mathrm{\Delta }r=30^{\prime \prime }`$ located at $`4.5^{}`$ from the center, and has been chosen to fall entirely in the central MOS chip. The comparison with the expected mirror PSF, also shown in Fig. 1 indicates that the central source is extended. The bright core region can be defined up to $`50^{\prime \prime }`$ from the center; Further out, the slope changes and the behavior of the soft curve and hard curve is different. The hard curve declines with the same slope down to the limit of the radio nebula at $`200^{\prime \prime }`$, while the soft curve is clearly flatter than the hard one, with a sudden change of slope occurring at $`140^{\prime \prime }`$.

The core is elongated in the N-S direction, with a FWHM of $`13.5\pm 1.5^{\prime \prime }`$ in this direction ($`9.0\pm 1.5^{\prime \prime }`$ in the E-W direction), in agreement with the ROSAT HRI results presented by H95. The centroid of the MOS1 emission is located 4′′ and 8′′ south of the ROSAT and Einstein positions. The data confirm that the radio wisp observed by Frail & Moffett (1993) is located to the East of the X-ray peak, at 5′′ from the the MOS1 centroid. However, the uncertainties in real attitude reconstruction, which is still not fully implemented, may give an uncertainty in absolute position determination as large as $`5^{\prime \prime }`$.

Fig. 2 shows the summed MOS1+2 images of 3C58 in three different bands, namely 0.1-1 keV, 1–2 keV and 2–10 keV bands, along with the weakest 1446 MHz radio contour at 0.15 Jy beam-1 and the contour at 0.6 Jy beam-1 of Fig. 3 in Reynolds & Aller (1988) (both in white in Fig. 2). A small separation of the two contours (e.g. in the SW) indicates limb brightening and therefore confinement in the source. In addition, we also shown the X-ray contours (in yellow), and it is clear that there is correspondence between the radio contours and the X-ray emission of the soft image. In particular, the weakest radio contour matches the outer edge of the weak extended X-ray emission, especially at the north and south edges. Fig. 2 also shows that the size of the nebula decreases as the energy increases, an effect also reported by Torii et al. (2000).

### 2.3 Spectral analysis

The high spatial and spectral resolution of the instrumentation aboard the XMM-Newton satellite allows us for the first time to perform spatially resolved spectral analysis of the X-ray nebula associated to 3C58. To this end, we extracted spectra from 8 concentric annuli with $`\mathrm{\Delta }r=8^{\prime \prime }`$ centered at the same position of the X-ray profiles of Fig. 1, covering the core emission up to 1.1 from the center. Given the uncertainties in present calibration of the MOS and PN cameras, and the energy dependence of the vignetting correction above 5 keV, we have restricted our spectral analysis to photons in the 0.5–5 keV energy band. The spectra have been background subtracted using the same background region introduced in the previous subsection, and have been rebinned to ensure that a minimum of 30 counts are present in each energy channel. As for response matrices and effective area files, we have used the latest version of standard MOS and PN matrices provided by the calibration team (mos1\_medium\_all\_qe17\_rmf3\_tel5\_15 and epn\_fs20\_sY9\_medium). We have summed the spectra extracted with MOS1 and MOS2, and we have also rescaled the response matrix to reflect this operation111We will refer hereafter to the summed spectra as simply the MOS spectra.. Besides the 8 annuli, we have also defined a region (the ”edge” region hereafter), represented by the union of two ellipses matching the outer X-ray edge of the nebula222The E-W and N-S ellipses have large and small semi-axis of $`3.3{}_{}{}^{}\times 1.1^{}`$ and $`1.7{}_{}{}^{}\times 1.1^{}`$, respectively., minus a circle with same radius as the 8th annulus. This region is particularly suited for the study of the X-ray emission coming from the outermost fringes of the X-ray and radio nebula.

We have used three different emission models to fit the 3C58 data, namely a power-law model, a power-law model plus the optically thin plasma model of Mewe et al. (1985) with Fe L calculation of Liedahl et al. (1995), pl+mekal hereafter, and a power-law model plus a black-body spectrum, pl+bbody hereafter. These three models encompass what we could possibly expect from an X-ray nebula, the last two representing eventual contributions from a thermal shell (as in the case of known plerion-composite SNR), and from a compact source in the center as pointed out by Helfand et al. (1995). The temperature of the pl+mekal model and of the pl+bbody models have been constrained in the 0.1–10 keV and in the 0.1–2.0 keV, respectively. Abundances are those of Anders & Grevesse (1989). All the models have been modified by the interstellar absorption according to cross-sections of Morrison & McCammon (1983), where we have let the equivalent hydrogen column density $`N_H`$ vary. Since we have noted that the non-thermal component provides most of the flux in the XMM-Newton bandwidth, and that the residual thermal components of the model pl+mekal and pl+bbody are correlated with the value of $`N_H`$, we have also performed a set of fittings fixing the $`N_H`$ value to $`4\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2, which is compatible with previous estimates (Helfand et al. (1995),Torii et al. (2000)) and it is also consistent with the result we obtained letting it vary.

#### 2.3.1 The $`\gamma `$ vs. radius relation

Fig. 3 shows the best-fit value of the absorption and of the power-law photon index ($`\gamma `$) as a function of the distance from remnant center, obtained with a fit to a power-law emission model only. The data clearly show the effect of synchrotron burn-off of high energy electrons as the radius increases. This effect has also been observed in G21.5-0.9 both with Chandra (Slane et al. (2000)) and XMM-Newton (Warwick et al. (2000)) and it is related to inhomogeneity in the particle distribution inside the plerion nebula. The straight line in the lower panel of Fig. 3 represents the linear best-fit to the $`\gamma r`$ relation, $`\gamma =A+Br`$ with $`A=1.97\pm 0.03`$ and $`B=8.0\pm 0.6\times 10^3`$ and $`r`$ is in arcseconds. The MOS fits to the single power-law reported in Fig. 3 are statistically acceptable333We regard a fit as statistically acceptable when the null hypothesis probability computed from the reduced $`\chi ^2`$ and number of degrees of freedom is greater then 5%. from ring 1 to ring 6, while not acceptable in rings 7-8 and in “the edge” region. This is true for both $`N_H`$ free and $`N_H`$ fixed fits, and Table 1 reports the $`\chi ^2/dof`$ values of the fits. It is interesting to note that the $`N_H`$ value, when left free to vary, is significantly lower than the average value of $`4\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2 for the outer nebula regions (Fig. 3). Moreover, the best-fit $`\gamma `$ of the shell is off the trend dictated by fit to the spectra of the rings when $`N_H`$ is left free to vary, while it shows lower deviation in the fit with $`N_H`$ fixed. If the X-ray emission of the outer rings is dominated by the non-thermal component of the plerion, we do not expect significative variation of the absorption, and the data seem to confirm that a fixed $`N_H`$ may be more appropriate. However, the fact that fits of the outer rings and “edge” data are less acceptable than fits to inner rings data strongly suggests a contribution from other components.

#### 2.3.2 Additional thermal components

In order to assess the presence of any additional emission from a central compact source (as suggested by H95) and from any thermal shell, we now consider the results of fits with pl+mekal and pl+bbody models. The inclusion of the additional component (mekal or bbody) does not increase the null hypothesis probability above 5%, except for ring 8. This is also reported in Table 1, in which the reader finds the data needed to evaluate the goodness of the fits we have performed. However, it should be noted that the inclusion of the mekal component leads to a reduction of $`\chi ^2`$ (and therefore to a better fit in a relative way) for the outermost rings, and a dramatic reduction in case of the “edge” region, specially for MOS. This is also shown in Fig. 4, where we show the MOS “edge” spectrum along with its power-law only and pl+mekal best-fit model and residuals, and in Table 2 where we summarize the results of spectral fitting to the “edge” spectrum. In Fig. 5, we report the ratio of the flux of the second component ($`f_{\mathrm{mekal}}`$ from the pl+mekal fit in the upper panel, and $`f_{\mathrm{bbody}}`$ from the pl+bbody fit in the lower panel) to the total flux of ring 1-8 and the “edge” region.

The fit with an additional black-body component to ring 1 places an upper limit to the unabsorbed flux due to this component of 20% of the total 0.5–2.0 keV flux in this region (i.e. $`1.5\times 10^{13}`$ erg cm-2 s-1, or a luminosity $`L_X=1.8\times 10^{32}D_{3.2}^2`$ erg s-1, where $`D_{3.2}`$ is the distance in units of 3.2 kpc, which is the most reliable value according to Roberts et al. (1993)) and 10% of the total 0.5–10.0 keV flux of this region (i.e. $`1.6\times 10^{13}`$ erg cm-2 s-1, same $`L_X`$ as before). Since the whole remnant 0.5–10 keV flux is $`1.6\times 10^{11}`$ erg cm-2 s-1, the upper limit corresponds to 1% of the remnant flux, significantly below the 7% found by Torii et al. (2000). Fig. 5 also shows that spectral fittings of rings 2-6 yields only upper-limits to the presence of an additional mekal or black-body thermal emission.

On the other hand, the situation is different for ring 8 and the “edge” region (Table 1 and 2), where the addition of the thermal component yields a significant decrement of the $`\chi ^2`$ (according to an F-test) and the thermal flux contribution to the 0.5–2.0 total flux is between 5% and 30%. In particular, the pl+mekal fit in the “edge” region suggests that between 10 and 20% of the 0.5–2.0 keV flux from this region ($`59\times 10^{13}`$ erg cm-2 s-1, or $`L_X=5.810.0\times 10^{32}D_{3.2}^2`$ erg s-1) is due to the thermal component (8–14% if we consider the 0.5–10 keV band). If compared to the whole remnant 0.5–10 keV flux, the thermal soft excess yields a contribution of 3%–6%. It is important to note that in this region the pl+mekal model is to be preferred over the pl+bbody model (Table 2).

#### 2.3.3 PSF effects

We have also investigated whether our results are affected by any effect related to the Point Spread Function (PSF) of the XMM-Newton mirror. Since only 55% of the photons of a point source are contained within a circle of 8′′ radius, we expect a certain amount of scattering outside the rings. However, this effect is not likely to modify our conclusions. In the central ring, for instance, the strongly peaked morphology keeps the contamination from ring 2 low. Moreover, the scattering can only smooth the $`\gamma r`$ relation in Fig. 3, so the observed slope is, strictly speaking, a lower limit to the real slope. Finally, in order to verify whether the soft component detected at large radii is an artifact of the PSF, we have followed this procedure: we have fitted the summed spectrum of rings 1-8 with a power-law model, and we have found $`N_H=3.9\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2 and $`\gamma =2.21`$; then, we have fitted the spectrum of the “edge” region with the best-fit model found for ring 1-8 with fixed $`N_H`$ and $`\gamma `$, plus a second absorbed power-law model with free $`N_H`$ and $`\gamma `$. The normalizations of the two models were left free to vary. We have found that the best-fit normalization of the “fixed” power-law is zero, suggesting that negligible contamination from the spectrum of the ring 1-8 is observed in the “edge” spectrum.

### 2.4 Timing analysis

In order to search pulsed X-ray emission from the central source which is powering 3C58, we have calculated the power spectrum density of the time series of events of the central ring used for spectral analysis. Unfortunately, the time resolution of the EPIC cameras when operated in full image mode is low, and we were not able to sample frequencies above 1 Hz. For timing analysis, we have collected MOS1 and PN photons in ring 1 between 0.5 and 10 keV, and we have analyzed the two independently. Furthermore, we have also analyzed a more restricted energy range, 2–10 keV.

None of the power spectra show features significant at the 99% confidence level. The corresponding MOS1 upper limits to relative amplitude of a sinusoidal pulsed signal in the $`5\times 10^30.1`$ Hz is 6.2% and 10.0% for the 0.5–10 keV and 2–10 keV respectively, while the PN upper limits in the $`10^21`$ Hz are 2.0% and 3.1% in the broad and hard band, respectively.

## 3 Discussion

The good spatial and spectral resolution XMM-Newton data on 3C58 has allowed us to perform a detailed spatially resolved spectral analysis of this remnant, and in particular, to address the topic of the spectra of the compact core at its center and the presence of an X-ray shell.

### 3.1 The compact core

The possible emission mechanisms for the compact core of 3C58 have been reviewed by H95, and a preference has been given to a thermal model for the emission from hot polar caps, mostly on the basis of a review of ROSAT and Einstein HRI data. Torii et al. (2000) have confirmed the detection of an additional component in the remnant spectrum, which they have modeled with a black-body of kT=$`0.400.45`$ keV and a flux of $`1.5\times 10^{33}D_{3.2}^2`$ erg s-1 in the 0.5–10 keV band. While the Torii et al. (2000) flux estimate is within 20% of the H95 one, we have found in ring 1 an upper limit to the flux of the kT=0.25 keV black-body component a factor of 10 less than the H95 estimate. The inferred upper limit on the emitting area is $`1.3\times 10^{10}`$ cm2 (corresponding to a radius of $`650`$ m), more or less the value found by Torii et al. (2000), and this is expected since our best-fit temperature is a factor of two less than the one derived by ASCA. By forcing the temperature at the value of Torii et al. (2000), the corresponding upper limits are $`9.4\times 10^{14}`$ erg cm-2 s-1 ($`L_X=1.1\times 10^{32}D_{3.2}^2`$ erg s-1) and $`8\times 10^8`$ cm2. While this large difference in the inferred black-body flux may seem puzzling, it may be explained by the dramatic improvement of the XMM-Newton spatial resolution compared with the ASCA one. In fact, if we compute the sum of our best-fit values for the flux of the black-body component of the pl+bbody fit over all the rings and the “edge” region, we obtain a 0.5–10 keV flux of $`1.2\times 10^{12}`$ erg cm-2 s-1, or a luminosity of $`1.3\times 10^{33}D_{3.2}^2`$ erg s-1, in very good agreement with the value reported by H95 and Torii et al. (2000). More than 50% of this flux comes from ring 7-8 and the “edge” region: it is therefore probable that the ASCA data correctly detected a soft excess in the integrated spectrum of 3C58, but this was incorrectly attributed to the thermal component of the central compact object, whereas Fig. 5 suggests that it comes from the external parts of the nebula. The more stringent XMM-Newton upper limit to the black-body component also heavily constrains its interpretation. Our value of the emission area is too low to assume that the whole surface of neutron star is loosing the residual heat of formation, and therefore would suggest the hot polar caps mechanisms. A review of the polar caps heating mechanisms can be found by Yancopoulos et al. (1994). H95 favors the “outer-gap” model, and in this case we expect $`L_X=10^{30}B_{12}P^2`$ erg s-1, where $`B_{12}`$ is the magnetic field in units of $`10^{12}`$ G and P is the period in seconds. As shown in Fig. 6, our $`L_X`$ upper limit yields a magnetic field higher than the highest value known for allowed $`B`$ and $`P`$ values of an 810 yr old pulsar. For this model to be compatible with the $`L_X`$ upper limit, either an older pulsar must be present or, unlike the Crab, the pulsar has not suffered high energy losses, in which case all the points below the isochrone lines of Fig. 6 are allowed. Other mechanisms invoked to explain the hot polar caps yield estimates of $`L_X`$ lower then the “outer-gap” model and in principle may be compatible with the observations. However, other observed pulsar nebulae–thermal pulsar pairs reported by Seward & Wang (1988) show a ratio between compact object luminosity and total (pulsar+nebula) luminosity $`L_\mathrm{c}/L_{\mathrm{tot}}`$ of $`0.10.2`$ (the Crab has $`L_\mathrm{c}/L_{\mathrm{tot}}=0.04`$), while, using the observed total 3C58 luminosity of $`1.8\times 10^{34}`$ erg s-1and the upper limit we have derived, we derive a ratio $`<0.01`$. Fig. 6 also shows that we expect a period less then 1 s for reasonable values of $`B`$, and therefore, to properly detect a pulsation, we would need a better time resolution than those of the EPIC camera in full image mode.

### 3.2 Thermal emission at the edge of the nebula

The interpretation of the additional component in terms of expansion of the main shock in the environment of the SNR cannot be excluded a priori: recently, there have been some cases of SNRs reclassified as composite (e.g. G11.2-0.3, Vasisht et al. (1996); G327.1-1.1, Sun et al. (1999)). The observed temperature of the mekal component corresponds to a shock speed of $`450`$ km s-1, while the emissivity corresponds to a post-shock density of $`(0.60\pm 0.15)D_{3.2}^{1/2}`$ cm-3 and a pre-shock density four times smaller (assuming the emission comes from a thin shell at $`r=2.5^{}`$, where the soft profile in Fig. 1 drops rapidly, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }r=r/12`$). The emitting mass is of the order of 0.1$`D_{3.2}^{5/2}`$ M. The inferred density is very reasonable for typical low galactic latitude Sedov SNRs, but on the other hand it can hardly be reconciled with the association between SN1181 and 3C58. This is shown in Fig. 7, which reports the allowed values of the SNR age and of the distance according to a simple Sedov analysis following the outline given in Kassim et al. (1993). It is clear that from a pure geometrical point of view, the measured X-ray temperature may represent a Sedov shock of an $`800`$ yr old SNR located at a distance of 3.2 kpc (“Geom.” solid line in Fig. 7), but the measured emission measure of the mekal component yields a solution with a distance well above 10 kpc and and a remnant age well in excess of $`10^4`$ yr, if we assume that the explosion energy is of the order of the “canonical” value $`10^{51}`$ erg ($`\mathrm{log}E_{51}=0`$ in Fig. 7, where $`E_{51}`$ is in units of $`10^{51}`$ erg). Among the lowest values of the explosion energy quoted in the literature, we have $`E_{51}=0.1`$ for Vela (Bocchino et al. (1999)) and $`0.020.3`$ for G292.0+1.8 (Hughes & Singh (1994)), and we note that, for $`E_{51}=0.01`$, Fig. 7 gives a solution of a remnant at 8–10 kpc and an age of $`30006000`$ yr. The association 3C58-SN1181 suggests an explosion energy of the order of $`10^{48}`$ erg, roughly ten times lower than the lowest inferred. We recall that the association have been questioned by Huang (1986), but recently Stephenson & Green (1999) have pointed out that, on the basis of an update of historical information, the association should be reliable. If so, the Sedov model does not provide a proper description of all the observational evidence.

In order to understand the interaction between 3C58 and its environment, and to understand the origin of the soft X-ray component, it is useful to compare its radio and X-ray emission. The soft X-ray maps of Fig. 2 show that the X-ray emission is in any case confined within 2–4 from the center, and therefore the presence of the shell is in agreement with the lack of detection of a radio shell at $`r>5^{}`$ of Reynolds & Aller (1985). It is interesting to note that there is a close correspondence between the radio morphology of the outer regions of the nebula and the soft X-ray maps (Fig. 2, upper panel). This is also observed in other shell-like young SNR like Kepler (Matsui et al. (1984)) and Cas A (Keohane et al. (1996)), while, on the other hand, the radio emission of the Crab nebula is four times greater than its X-ray counterpart. Reynolds & Aller (1988) have pointed out that the radio image of the remnant at 1446 MHz shows confined-edge emission at some locations of the outer regions of the nebula, and some of these also show limb-brightening. According to them, this may be explained if the edge of the nebula is sweeping up moving material, e.g. ejecta, like in the “inhomogeneous” model of Reynolds & Chevalier (1984), or the shock model invoked by Sankrit & Hester (1997) to explain the \[O III\] emission seen at the boundary of the Crab. This may explain the small amount of limb brightening and is also in agreement with the relatively slow shock speed measured in X-rays. In fact, the expected shock speed in the moving ejecta material is $`300`$ km s-1 (Reynolds & Chevalier (1984); 150-200 km s-1 in the Crab according to Sankrit & Hester (1997)), and we observe $`v_s=450`$ km s-1. Therefore, the thermal component we observe in the outer rim of 3C58 may be associated with the expansion of the nebula in the inner ejecta core. Note that this is also in agreement with the discrepancy between the large speed measured in 3C58 filaments ($`900`$ km s-1, Fesen (1983)) and the X-ray derived speed. In fact, the filaments are composed of material ejected in the explosion itself, pushed on and accelerated by the synchrotron nebula, while the X-ray emission is due a shock expanding into moving ejecta. However, the low value of the X-ray emitting mass would imply that the interaction is only at its beginning.

Finally, it should be noted that the above conclusions rely on the hypothesis of fast electron-ion equipartition. Unfortunately, it is not possible to independently measure the proton temperature $`T_p`$ of the 3C58 shock. Bocchino et al. (1999) have shown that $`T_e<T_p<2T_e`$ for a shock region of the old Vela SNR, but Hughes et al. (2000) found evidence for $`T_p45T_e`$ in the 1000 yr old SNR E0102.2-7219, suggesting that non-equipartition may be common among young SNRs. If also in case of 3C58 $`T_p`$ is $`45`$ times higher than the X-ray derived electron temperature, than a Sedov solution with $`E_03\times 10^{49}`$ erg, would be compatible with a distance of 3.2 kpc and the association with SN1181.

## 4 Summary and conclusions

The high spatial resolution of the EPIC camera on-board XMM-Newton has allowed us to look with unprecedented detail at the X-ray emission from the filled-center SNR 3C58. We have presented soft (0.1–1 keV), medium (1–2 keV) and hard (2–10 keV) energy images, and we have found a close correlation of the soft image with radio emission at 1446 MHz. A quantitative study of the source profile shows the effect of synchrotron burn-off and indicates a different slope of the soft X-ray radial profile compared to that obtained in the hard band. Spatially resolved spectral analysis carried on in rings with $`\mathrm{\Delta }r=8^{\prime \prime }`$ has allowed us to derive the relation between the spectral index and the distance from the core. In contrast with previous ASCA results, we have not found evidence for thermal black-body emission from a central source, and we have placed an upper limit to this component of $`L_X=1.8\times 10^{32}`$ erg s-1. This stringent upper-limit rules out thermal emission from the whole surface of the putative neutron star at the center of 3C58, and also rules out the “outer-gap” model for hot polar caps of Cheng et al. (1986), unless the pulsar has very low rotational energy losses.

The large effective area of the XMM-Newton mirrors has allowed us to perform, for the first time, a spectral analysis of the outer edge of the 3C58 X-ray nebula, excluding the inner and brighter regions. We have found that non-thermal emission is still responsible for most of the emission there, but a soft thermal component is required to better fit the spectrum below 1 keV. If represented with an optically thin emission model, this component gives kT=0.2–0.3 keV. If it is associated to the Sedov expansion of the 3C58 shell, it is incompatible with the association between 3C58 and SN1181, unless there is strong deviation from electron-ion equipartition. If it is due to the expansion of the nebula into the inner core of moving ejecta, the X-ray spectra characteristics and the radio morphology of the outer nebula can be more easily reconciled.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank the whole XMM-Newton team for its effort in producing well-calibrated data at this early stage of the mission. F. Bocchino acknowledges an ESA Research Fellowship and thanks R. Bandiera for helpful discussions.


format: text

text:
# Solutions of Conformal Gravity with Dynamical Mass Generation in the Solar System

## I Introduction

It has become increasingly probable in recent times that general relativity is on its way to being falsified as a classical theory of gravitation. General relativity fails to account for the motions of galactic clusters ( ,) and rotations of individual galaxies ( , , see also  and references therein) without the ad hoc assumption of varying amounts and distributions of cold dark matter . At the same time the existence of cold dark matter in the universe is becoming more and more in doubt. As determined by the Boomerang Experiment, the small amplitude of the second peak relative to the first in the power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background does not support the cold dark matter hypothesis . Even within the solar system general relativity has met with a potential failure. Radio metric data from the Pioneer 10/11, Galileo, and Ulysses spacecraft indicate a constant (with respect to radius from the sun), radial acceleration directed toward the sun of magnitude $`8.5\times 10^{10}`$ m s<sup>-2</sup>, in addition to the expected Newtonian-Einsteinian acceleration that varies as the inverse radius squared . Furthermore, Viking Lander ranging data limit any such anomalous radial accelerations on the planets Earth and Mars to less than one hundredth of that detected on the spacecraft, a violation of the equivalence principle. On a more fundamental plane, general relativity is not compatible with dynamical mass generation in that the latter leads to a manifestly traceless energy-momentum tensor as the source for Einstein’s field equation, while the Einstein tensor, the left side of the field equation, is not traceless.

Collectively these problems pose a challenge to general relativity as a classical theory of gravity, and it may be appropriate to seriously consider alternatives. Two such alternatives have appeared in the literature in recent years: (1) Milgrom’s modified Newtonian dynamics (MOND) , and (2) the Weyl fourth-order, conformally invariant gravitational theory which has been re-examined recently by Mannheim and Kazanas  and extended by Mannheim to include dynamic mass generation . Both of these theories have been used to account for galactic rotation curves without dark matter , . However, only (2) is compatible with dynamical mass generation, in fact requires it, and therefore we believe (2) is the stronger candidate as an alternative to general relativity.

In this paper we investigate conformal gravity with dynamical mass generation in the solar system to see whether the theory can account for the anomalous, constant radial acceleration on the spacecraft while also passing the standard solar system tests, namely light bending at the limb of the sun and perihelion precession. As the field equations of conformal gravity are nonlinear, fourth-order differential equations, exact analytic solutions are not possible, even in a simple solar system model. We first consider approximate solutions and then confirm the general validity of the approximate results with complete numerical solutions of the interior and exterior problems with matched boundary conditions at the limb of the sun. We find that a completely conformal theory, including a scalar Higgs field for dynamical mass generation, does, in fact, predict an anomalous, nearly-constant radial acceleration toward the sun on a test particle such as a spacecraft, while at the same time satisfying the standard solar system tests. Furthermore, we give a qualitative argument why planets should behave differently than spacecraft and not exhibit the same anomalous radial acceleration.

## II Conformal gravity with dynamic mass generation

Conformal gravity is based on the Weyl geometry action,

$`I_w`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha {\displaystyle d^4x\sqrt{g}C_{\mu \nu \lambda \rho }C^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho }}`$ (1)
$`=`$ $`2\alpha {\displaystyle d^4x\sqrt{g}\left(R_{\mu \nu }R^{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{3}R^2\right)}+\left(\text{surface term}\right),`$ (2)
where $`C_{\mu \nu \lambda \rho }`$ is the Weyl conformal tensor, $`gdet\left(g_{\mu \nu }\right)`$, $`R_{\mu \nu \lambda \rho }`$ is the Riemann tensor, $`R_{\mu \nu }R^\lambda _{\mu \lambda \nu }`$ is the Ricci tensor, $`RR^\mu _\mu `$ is the Ricci scalar, and $`\alpha `$ is a dimensionless constant. The Weyl action is invariant under a conformal transformation, $`g_{\mu \nu }\left(x\right)\left[\mathrm{\Omega }\left(x\right)\right]^2g_{\mu \nu }\left(x\right)`$, which is an arbitrary, continuous deformation of the spacetime manifold. We use a metric signature $`(,+,+,+)`$ and the sign conventions of Weinberg .

For dynamic mass generation, following Mannheim , we choose a conformally invariant matter action in a model consisting of a self-interacting scalar Higgs field $`S`$ and a generic fermion field $`\psi `$ with a Yukawa interaction with the scalar field as in the Standard Model of particle physics. The requirement of conformal invariance restricts such a matter action to the form

$`I_m={\displaystyle }d^4x\sqrt{g}\{i\overline{\psi }[\gamma ^\mu \left(x\right)(_\mu +\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu \left(x\right))+ihS]\psi `$

$$+\frac{1}{2}_\mu S^\mu S\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{R}{6}\right)S^2+\lambda S^4\},$$
(3)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu \left(x\right)`$ is a spin connection, $`h`$ is a dimensionless Yukawa coupling constant, and the quadratic term in $`S`$ with $`R/6<0`$ creates a situation of spontaneous symmetry breaking and consequent dynamical mass generation.

Setting the variation of the total action, $`I=I_w+I_m`$, with respect to the metric equal to zero yields the Weyl field equations,

$$W_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{4\alpha }T_{\mu \nu },$$
(4)
where the source,

$`T_{\mu \nu }`$ $``$ $`\delta I_m/\delta g^{\mu \nu }=i\overline{\psi }\gamma _\mu \left(x\right)\left[_\nu +\mathrm{\Gamma }_\nu \left(x\right)\right]\psi `$ (7)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}S_\mu S_\nu {\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}g_{\mu \nu }S_\lambda S^\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}SS_{\mu ;\nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}g_{\mu \nu }SS^\lambda _{;\lambda }`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}S^2\left(R_{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_{\mu \nu }R\right)g_{\mu \nu }\lambda S^4,`$
is the energy-momentum tensor, which in this theory includes the scalar Higgs field, and the tensor on the left side,

$`W_{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}g_{\mu \nu }R^{;\lambda }{}_{;\lambda }{}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R_{;\mu ;\nu }+R_{\mu \nu }{}_{}{}^{;\lambda }{}_{;\lambda }{}^{}R_\mu {}_{}{}^{\lambda }{}_{;\nu ;\lambda }{}^{}R_\nu {}_{}{}^{\lambda }_{;\mu ;\lambda }`$

$$+\frac{2}{3}RR_{\mu \nu }2R_\mu {}_{}{}^{\lambda }R_{\lambda \nu }^{}+\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu }R_{\lambda \rho }R^{\lambda \rho }\frac{1}{6}g_{\mu \nu }R^2$$
(8)
was first obtained by Bach .

Setting the variation of the action with respect to the two fields to zero yields the two field equations of motion,

$$\left\{i\gamma ^\mu \left(x\right)\left[_\mu +\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu \left(x\right)\right]hS\right\}\psi =0,$$
(9)
$$S^\mu {}_{;\mu }{}^{}+\frac{R}{6}S4\lambda S^3=h\overline{\psi }\psi .$$
(10)
Equation (9) is the Dirac equation in curved spacetime with a fermion mass due to spontaneous symmetry breaking given by

$$m=hS.$$
(11)
Equation (10) is the Klein-Gordon equation in curved spacetime with a self interaction, $`4\lambda S^3`$, and a fermion source, $`h\overline{\psi }\psi `$. The scalar curvature, or more precisely $`R/6`$, plays the role of the mass squared of the Higgs boson. In contrast to the Standard Model of particle physics, where the field point of the Higgs vacuum is a universal constant over all spacetime, in the present context the Higgs field is dynamically connected to the metric of spacetime through Eqs. (4), (9), and (10), and is not constant in general. In the present problem the Higgs field varies radially from the sun, and it is the radial gradient of the Higgs field that is responsible for the anomalous radial acceleration.

The traceless property of the energy-momentum tensor with dynamic mass generation is most easily established from Eq. (7) starting in a gauge where the scalar Higgs field takes on a constant, nonzero value $`S_0`$. In this case, using the field equations of motion, Eqs. (9) and (10), we see that $`T^\mu {}_{\mu }{}^{}=0`$. Since $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ is a conformal tensor, under conformal transformation, $`T^\mu {}_{\mu }{}^{}=g^{\mu \nu }T_{\mu \nu }\left[\mathrm{\Omega }^2\left(x\right)\right]^1g^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{\Omega }^2\left(x\right)T_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\Omega }^4\left(x\right)T^\nu _\nu `$. In general the scalar Higgs field transform as $`S\left(x\right)S\left(x\right)/\mathrm{\Omega }\left(x\right)`$. Therefore, in a general gauge in which the Higgs field is not constant, $`S\left(x\right)=S_0/\mathrm{\Omega }\left(x\right)`$, and the trace of the energy-momentum tensor is still zero since $`T^\nu {}_{\nu }{}^{}=\mathrm{\Omega }^4\left(x\right)T^\mu {}_{\mu }{}^{}=0`$.

The Bach tensor, the left side of the field equations, Eq. (4), is also traceless, as can be seen from Eq. (8) which gives

$`W^\mu _\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R^{;\lambda }{}_{;\lambda }{}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R^{;\mu }{}_{;\mu }{}^{}+R^{;\lambda }{}_{;\lambda }{}^{}2R^{\mu \lambda }_{;\mu ;\lambda }`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R^22R^{\mu \lambda }R_{\mu \lambda }+2R_{\lambda \rho }R^{\lambda \rho }{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}R^2`$
$`=`$ $`0,`$
where we have used the covariant divergence of the contracted Bianchi identity, $`\left(R^{\mu \lambda }g^{\mu \lambda }R/2\right)_{;\mu ;\lambda }=0`$, to establish the cancellation of the third and fourth terms. Thus dynamical mass generation is compatible with conformal gravity but not with general relativity since the Einstein tensor is not traceless in general: $`E^\mu {}_{\mu }{}^{}=R^\mu {}_{\mu }{}^{}\frac{1}{2}g^\mu {}_{\mu }{}^{}R=R0`$ .

In general relativity the predictive power of the theory lies in the postulate that a test particle of mass $`m`$ follows a world line on the spacetime manifold that minimizes the action

$$I=mc𝑑\tau ,$$
(12)
where $`d\tau =\sqrt{g_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu }`$ is the line element. With the mass $`m`$ of the test particle constant, the path is a geodesic. However, the action of Eq. (12) is not suitable for a conformal theory because it is not invariant under conformal transformation. In fact, conformal gravity has been criticized by Perlick and Xu  as being non-predictive except for null geodesics because the action of Eq. (12) is arbitrarily variable under conformal transformation. What these authors have failed to recognize is that a conformal theory must be completely conformal. The action of Eq. (12) must be replaced by a conformally invariant action, and the way to make this change is apparent from Eqs. (11) and (12). The mass of the test particle in a conformal theory must no longer be a fixed attribute of the particle, but instead it is a dynamic quantity generated through spontaneous broken symmetry and given by Eq. (11). The mass of the test particle now depends on position in spacetime and must be moved inside the integral,

$$I=cm\left(x\right)𝑑\tau =hcS\left(x\right)𝑑\tau .$$
(13)
The action of Eq. (13) is invariant since under conformal transformation $`d\tau \mathrm{\Omega }\left(x\right)d\tau `$ and $`S\left(x\right)\left[\mathrm{\Omega }\left(x\right)\right]^1S\left(x\right)`$. Thus we see that a conformal theory of gravity is not only compatible with dynamical mass generation but is non-predictive without it.

Conformal geodesic equations are obtained from the conformal action given by Eq. (13) by requiring it to be stationary for arbitrary small variations in path between two fixed points in spacetime:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{hc}}=\delta {\displaystyle _{P_1}^{P_2}}S\left(x\right)𝑑\tau ={\displaystyle _{P_1}^{P_2}}\left[\delta Sd\tau +S\delta \left(d\tau \right)\right]=0,`$

$`{\displaystyle _{P_1}^{P_2}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{S}{x^\sigma }}\delta x^\sigma {\displaystyle \frac{S}{2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{dx^\mu }{d\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{dx^\nu }{d\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{g_{\mu \nu }}{x^\sigma }}`$

$`+g_{\mu \sigma }{\displaystyle \frac{dx^\mu }{d\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\left(\delta x^\sigma \right)}{d\tau }}+g_{\sigma \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{d\left(\delta x^\sigma \right)}{d\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{dx^\nu }{d\tau }}]\}d\tau =0,`$

and, integrating by parts with $`\delta x^\sigma \left(P_1\right)=\delta x^\sigma \left(P_2\right)=0`$, we have

$`{\displaystyle _{P_1}^{P_2}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{S}{x^\sigma }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}S{\displaystyle \frac{dx^\mu }{d\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{dx^\nu }{d\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{g_{\mu \nu }}{x^\sigma }}`$

$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\tau }}\left[S(g_{\mu \sigma }{\displaystyle \frac{dx^\mu }{d\tau }}+g_{\sigma \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{dx^\nu }{d\tau }})\right]\}\delta x^\sigma d\tau =0.`$

For arbitrary variations $`\delta x^\sigma `$ and multiplying by $`g^{\rho \sigma }/S`$ and summing on $`\sigma `$, we obtain the conformal geodesic equation,

$$\frac{d^2x^\rho }{d\tau ^2}+\mathrm{\Gamma }^\rho {}_{\mu \nu }{}^{}\frac{dx^\mu }{d\tau }\frac{dx^\nu }{d\tau }+\frac{1}{S}\frac{S}{x^\lambda }\left(g^{\rho \lambda }+\frac{dx^\rho }{d\tau }\frac{dx^\lambda }{d\tau }\right)=0.$$
(14)
In their original paper on conformal gravity Mannheim and Kazanas  obtained an analytic solution of the homogeneous equations,

$$W_{\mu \nu }=0,$$
(15)
for a static, spherically-symmetric metric corresponding to the line element,

$$ds^2=b\left(r\right)c^2dt^2+\frac{1}{b\left(r\right)}dr^2+r^2\left(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2\right).$$
(16)
It is given by

$$b\left(r\right)=1\frac{\beta \left(23\beta \gamma \right)}{r}3\beta \gamma +\gamma r\kappa r^2,$$
(17)
where $`\beta `$, $`\gamma `$, and $`\kappa `$ are integration constants.

As Mannheim and Kazanas have shown, the above simple form of the metric suffices in a conformal theory. Starting with the general line element in terms of a radial coordinate $`\rho `$,

$$ds^2=B\left(\rho \right)c^2dt^2+A\left(\rho \right)dr^2+r^2\left(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2\right),$$
(18)
one makes a change of radial variable $`\rho =p\left(r\right)`$ and rewrites the line element as

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{p\left(r\right)}{r}}\right]^2[b\left(r\right)c^2dt^2+a\left(r\right)dr^2`$ (20)
$`+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2)],`$
where $`b\left(r\right)r^2B\left(p\left(r\right)\right)/\left[p\left(r\right)\right]^2`$ and $`a\left(r\right)r^2A\left(p\left(r\right)\right)\left(dp/dr\right)^2/\left[p\left(r\right)\right]^2`$. Then, if one chooses the function $`p\left(r\right)`$ to satisfy

$$\frac{1}{p\left(r\right)}=\frac{dr}{r^2\sqrt{A\left(p\left(r\right)\right)B\left(p\left(r\right)\right)}},$$
(21)
the line element becomes

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{p\left(r\right)}{r}}\right]^2[b\left(r\right)c^2dt^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{b\left(r\right)}}dr^2`$ (23)
$`+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2)],`$
which is related to the simple line element of Eq. (16) by a conformal transformation with $`\mathrm{\Omega }\left(r\right)=r/p\left(r\right)`$.

Mannheim and Kazanas  interpret Eq. (17) as an exterior vacuum solution with a Schwarzschild-like metric in a background de Sitter spacetime, where the integration constant $`\gamma `$ measures the departure from the Schwarzschild metric. They have argued that with $`\gamma 1`$ the metric of Eq. (17) enjoys all of the successes of general relativity in the solar system, while on larger interstellar scales in a galaxy the linear term $`\gamma r`$ can provide the increasing gravitational potential with radius required to supplement the decreasing Newtonian potential in order to account for the plateau characteristics of galactic rotation curves . They have also argued that the integration constant $`\kappa `$ is so small that the de Sitter term is negligible except on cosmological distance scales. Perlick and Xu  correctly have insisted that the values of the integration constants, $`\beta ,\gamma ,`$ and $`\kappa `$, cannot be chosen at will, but must be determined by matching boundary conditions with an interior solution at the inner boundary with the source and at infinity.

But there is an even more serious criticism of the vacuum solution of Mannheim and Kazanas, and that is it is not a vacuum solution at all. The vacuum in conformal gravity is not $`T_{\mu \nu }=0`$ because even outside the source the Higgs field must be nonzero. Otherwise a massive test particle would not be possible. Even in a gauge where the Higgs field is constant, outside the source the final term in Eq. (7) contributes to a nonzero energy-momentum tensor. The next to last term also contributes for all metrics in which the Ricci tensor is nonzero, including the metric of Mannheim and Kazanas given by Eq. (17). In a general gauge all the terms in Eq. (7) except the first contribute outside the source. We have argued above that conformal gravity not only is compatible with dynamical mass generation through spontaneous symmetry breaking of a Higgs vacuum, but also requires it in order to be predictive. It is therefore not logically consistent to ignore the Higgs contribution to the energy-momentum tensor outside the source, and the vacuum solution of Mannheim and Kazanas is not physically relevant by itself. All we can say is that mathematically it is an exact complimentary solution of the homogeneous field equations that may be a good approximation to an exterior particular solution.

## III Approximate analytic considerations

Before presenting our matched interior-exterior numerical solutions we begin our investigation by asking the question, what are the characteristics that would be required of the Higgs field in order to produce an anomalous, constant radial acceleration at large radii in the solar system such as that observed on Pioneer 10/11 etc. spacecraft, while at the same time permitting the theory to pass the standard tests in the inner solar system. This question can be answered by the conformal geodesic equation. We wish initially to answer it analytically, so we have to make a few simplifying assumptions. First, since the theory must pass the standard solar system tests, the metric must be very close to the Schwarzschild metric, and we will assume initially that it is exactly Schwarzschild. One way to assess this assumption is that the Schwarzschild metric satisfies $`R_{\mu \nu }=0`$, and therefore it also satisfies $`W_{\mu \nu }=0`$. So the Schwarzschild metric is a first approximation to the conformal metric with $`T_{\mu \nu }0`$. As we see from Eq. (7), the energy momentum tensor will be small outside the sun if the radial gradient of the Higgs field $`S`$ and the self coupling constant $`\lambda `$ are both small with respect to unity. We will see later from our numerical calculations that both of these assumptions are valid in the asymptotic region. Note that for the Schwarzschild metric the next to last term in $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ is identically zero since the scalar curvature $`R=R^\mu {}_{\mu }{}^{}=0`$. But realistically the metric must be near to Schwarzschild, but not exactly Schwarzschild because the mass squared of the Higgs particle is $`R/6`$.

Assuming spherical symmetry such that $`S=S\left(r\right)`$ and for a line element of the form of Eq. (16) with

$$b\left(r\right)=1\frac{2m}{r}$$
(24)
where $`mGM/c^2`$ is the geometric radius of the sun, the conformal geodesic equation, Eq. (14), evaluated for $`\rho =0,1,2,3`$ is given respectively by $`\left(c=1\right)`$

$$\frac{d}{d\tau }\left(bS\frac{dt}{d\tau }\right)=0,$$
(25)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2r}{d\tau ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}b{\displaystyle \frac{db}{dr}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dt}{d\tau }}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2b}}{\displaystyle \frac{db}{dr}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dr}{d\tau }}\right)^2br\left({\displaystyle \frac{d\theta }{d\tau }}\right)^2`$

$$br\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \left(\frac{d\varphi }{d\tau }\right)^2+\frac{1}{S}\frac{dS}{dr}\left[b+\left(\frac{dr}{d\tau }\right)^2\right]=0,$$
(26)
$$\frac{d^2\theta }{d\tau ^2}+\frac{2}{r}\frac{dr}{d\tau }\frac{d\theta }{d\tau }\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\theta \left(\frac{d\varphi }{d\tau }\right)^2+\frac{1}{S}\frac{dS}{dr}\frac{d\theta }{dr}\frac{dr}{d\tau }=0,$$
(27)
$$\frac{d^2\varphi }{d\tau ^2}+2\mathrm{cot}\theta \frac{d\theta }{d\tau }\frac{d\varphi }{d\tau }+\frac{2}{r}\frac{dr}{d\tau }\frac{d\varphi }{d\tau }+\frac{1}{S}\frac{dS}{dr}\frac{d\varphi }{dr}\frac{dr}{d\tau }=0.$$
(28)
For spherical symmetry, we lose no generality by restricting motion to the $`\theta =\pi /2`$ plane, in which case Eq. (27) is trivially satisfied. Equations (25) and (28) may be integrated once ($`l`$ and $`k`$ are constants of integration),

$$\frac{dt}{d\tau }=\frac{l}{bS},$$
(29)
$$r^2\frac{d\varphi }{d\tau }=\frac{k}{S},$$
(30)
and the result substituted into Eq. (26) giving

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2r}{d\tau ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2b}}{\displaystyle \frac{db}{dr}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{l^2}{S^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{dr}{d\tau }}\right)^2\right]`$

$$+\frac{1}{S}\frac{dS}{dr}\left[b+\left(\frac{dr}{d\tau }\right)^2\right]\frac{k^2b}{r^3S^2}=0.$$
(31)
From the line element with $`d\theta =0`$ and $`l/bS`$ substituted for $`dr/d\tau `$ according to Eq. (29), we write

$$1=\frac{l^2}{bS^2}\frac{1}{b}\left(\frac{dr}{d\tau }\right)^2\frac{k^2}{r^2S^2}.$$
(32)
Solving Eq. (32) for $`\left(dr/d\tau \right)^2`$ and substituting into Eq. (31) gives

$$\frac{d^2r}{d\tau ^2}+\frac{1}{2}\frac{db}{dr}\left(1+\frac{k^2}{r^2S^2}\right)+\frac{1}{S^3}\frac{dS}{dr}\left(l^2k^2b\right)\frac{k^2b}{r^3S^2}=0,$$
(33)
and finally for radial motion $`\left(k=0\right)`$,

$$\frac{d^2r}{d\tau ^2}+\frac{1}{2}\frac{db}{dr}+\frac{l^2}{S^3}\frac{dS}{dr}=0.$$
(34)
As the radiometric measurements of the accelerations of the spacecraft in the solar system are based on coordinate rather than proper time, we convert Eq. (34) to coordinate time using $`dt/d\tau =l/bS`$ and restore $`c`$ by letting $`tct`$,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2r}{dt^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{b}}{\displaystyle \frac{db}{dr}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S}}{\displaystyle \frac{dS}{dr}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{dr}{dt}}\right)^2`$

$$+\frac{b^2c^2S^2}{2l^2}\frac{db}{dr}+\frac{b^2c^2}{S}\frac{dS}{dr}=0.$$
(35)
It is the final term in Eq. (35) that has the potential of accounting for a constant radial acceleration for large radius. In this limit $`b=12m/r1`$, so we set

$$c^2\frac{d\mathrm{ln}S}{dr}=a\left(r\right),$$
(36)
where $`a\left(r\right)`$ is an anomalous acceleration. The next to final term in Eq. (35) accounts for the Newtonian acceleration.

$$\frac{b^2c^2S^2}{2l^2}\frac{db}{dr}=\frac{1}{l^2}\left(1\frac{2m}{r}\right)^2S^2\frac{GM}{r^2}\frac{S^2}{l^2}\frac{GM}{r^2}$$
(37)
since for $`r=40`$ AU, $`2m/r=2.0\times 10^81`$. Turning our attention to the second term in Eq. (35), we see from Eqs. (24) and (36) that

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{b}}{\displaystyle \frac{db}{dr}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S}}{\displaystyle \frac{dS}{dr}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{dr}{dt}}\right)^2=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{2m}{r^2}}{1\frac{2m}{r}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{a\left(r\right)}{c^2}}\right]\left({\displaystyle \frac{dr}{dt}}\right)^2`$

$$\left(\frac{2GM}{r^2}+a\left(r\right)\right)\left(\frac{1}{c}\frac{dr}{dt}\right)^2,$$
(38)
which is negligible for nonrelativistic speeds.

Based upon the above stated assumptions and approximations, the conformal geodesic equation, for nonrelativistic radial motion with a Schwarzschild metric, reduces asymptotically to

$$\frac{d^2r}{dt^2}=\frac{S^2}{l^2}\frac{GM}{r^2}a\left(r\right).$$
(39)
The requirement, based upon the radiometric data from the spacecraft, that $`a\left(r\right)=a_0`$ be asymptotically constant determines the asymptotic form that the scalar Higgs field must take through Eq. (36):

$$\frac{d\mathrm{ln}S}{dr}=\frac{a_0}{c^2},\mathrm{ln}S=\frac{a_0}{c^2}r+\mathrm{ln}S_0,S=S_0\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{a_0}{c^2}r\right).$$
(40)
For $`a_0=8.5\times 10^{10}`$ m s<sup>-2</sup> and $`r=40`$ AU, $`a_0r/c^2=5.6\times 10^{14}1`$ and the required asymptotic form is well approximated by

$$S=S_0\left(1+\frac{a_0}{c^2}r\right).$$
(41)
Then the Newtonian term in Eq. (39) becomes asymptotically

$$\frac{S^2}{l^2}\frac{GM}{r^2}=\frac{\left(S_0\right)^2}{l^2}\left(1+\frac{a_0}{c^2}r\right)^2\frac{GM}{r^2}\frac{GM}{r^2},$$
(42)
if we set the two integration constants equal, $`l=S_0`$, and neglect $`a_0r/c^2`$ with respect to $`1`$. Note from Eq. (29) that $`l`$ sets the scale of proper time, and we are free to measure proper time in any units we wish. Finally, if the Higgs field takes on the asymptotic form of Eq. (40), then the conformal geodesic equation becomes in the asymptotic region

$$\frac{d^2r}{dt^2}=\frac{GM}{r^2}a_0.$$
(43)
While Eq. (41) gives the required asymptotic form of the Higgs field in order for the conformal theory to account for the anomalous radial acceleration, it remains to be determined whether the conformal field equations have such an asymptotic solution. The answer to this question requires the full interior and exterior solutions with matched boundary conditions at the limb of the sun. But before turning our attention to a full solution of the field equations, it is instructive to consider an approximate analytic solution of Eq. (10), the equation of motion of the Higgs field, in the exterior region $`\left(\psi =0\right)`$, assuming the metric is exactly Schwarzschild $`\left(R=0\right)`$ and neglecting the self-interaction term $`\left(\lambda =0\right)`$. In this case and with spherical symmetry Eq. (10) becomes

$$S^{;\mu }{}_{;\mu }{}^{}=\frac{d^2S}{dr^2}+\frac{dS}{dr}(\frac{2m}{r^22mr}+\frac{2}{r})=0,$$
(44)
and this differential equation has a solution,

$$S=C_1\mathrm{ln}\left(1\frac{2m}{r}\right)+C_2.$$
(45)
Although there are two constants of integration in the solution of the second-order differential equation, physically only their ratio is important, as can be seen from the conformal geodesic equation, Eq. (14), in which for the present static case with spherical symmetry the Higgs dependent factor in Eq. (31) is

$$\frac{1}{S}\frac{dS}{dr}=\left(\frac{2m}{r^2}\right)\left(1\frac{2m}{r}\right)^1\left[\mathrm{ln}\left(1\frac{2m}{r}\right)+\frac{C_2}{C_1}\right]^1.$$
(46)
Thus we can choose either $`C_1`$ or $`C_2`$ arbitrarily and it is convenient to evaluate $`C_2`$ by setting $`S=S_0=1`$ m<sup>-1</sup> at $`r=R`$ at the limb of the sun. Then we have

$$C_2=1C_1\mathrm{ln}\left(1\frac{2m}{R}\right).$$
(47)
Ideally we should evaluate $`C_1`$ by matching the slope,

$$\frac{dS}{dr}=\frac{2mC_1}{r^22mr},$$
(48)
with the slope of an interior solution at the limb of the sun. But since at the present stage of the exposition we do not have an interior solution, we instead evaluate $`C_1`$ by the observational requirement of an anomalous radial acceleration of $`a_0=8.5\times 10^{10}`$ ms<sup>-2</sup> at a radius of $`r=R_{40}=`$ $`40`$ AU, giving

$`C_1=S_0[\mathrm{ln}(1{\displaystyle \frac{2m}{R_{40}}})\mathrm{ln}(1{\displaystyle \frac{2m}{R}})`$

$$\frac{2mc^2}{a_0R_{40}^2}(1\frac{2m}{R_{40}})^1]^1.$$
(49)
Evaluating Eqs. (49) and (47), we obtain $`C_1=1.20\times 10^4`$ m<sup>-1</sup> and $`C_2=1+5.14\times 10^{10}1`$ m<sup>-1</sup>. With these constants, the Higgs field $`S`$ is found to have a value that is nearly constant for $`r>0.1`$ AU, with a slope that is positive and very small with respect to unity (see Fig. 1, noting that only the first half AU is shown for clarity, which establishes the asymptotic trend). This approximate solution of the scalar field equation of motion shows that the features the scalar field can be expected to have are intuitively reasonable. Although the slope is not constant as would be required by observation, the inclusion of a nearly, but not exactly, Schwarzschild metric and a small but nonzero self coupling is enough to reduce the variation with radius significantly, as we shall see. The approximations used (zero Higgs mass and self coupling), although quite sweeping, are not so extreme as to take the analytic solution of the reduced equation far from the solutions of the full equation.

## IV Solar system tests

Two further questions need to be considered, and these are the effect of the scalar field on the deflection of light and perihelion precession, the standard solar system tests of any gravitational theory. These questions can be answered by the orbit equation ($`u1/r`$ and $`h`$ is the angular momentum per unit mass),

$$\frac{d^2u}{d\varphi ^2}=\frac{db}{du}\frac{u^2}{2}bu\frac{1}{h^2}\left(\frac{S^2}{2}\frac{db}{du}+bS\frac{dS}{du}\right),$$
(50)
which is derived from the conformal geodesic equation, Eq. (14), for the case of the conformal line element given by Eq. (16). Regarding the deflection of light, we note that the angular momentum per unit mass of a photon is infinite, and therefore the final term in Eq. (50) involving the scalar field is zero. This result is compatible with the fact that the photon, being massless, does not couple directly with the Higgs field. Thus there is no direct effect on the deflection of light. Indirectly the prediction of the conformal theory will differ from that of general relativity by the degree that $`b\left(r\right)`$ differs from the Schwarzschild metric. We will see in the numerical solution that this difference is minimal. On the question of perihelion precession, while the final term in Eq. (50) is nonzero we note that it does not contain the inverse radius, $`u`$. In the standard iterative solution of Eq. (50) assuming small eccentricity, the zeroth order approximation, $`u=u_0\left(1+e\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right)`$, is substituted into the right-hand side of the equation, resulting in a secular term, $`\left(3m^3/h^4\right)e\varphi \mathrm{sin}\varphi `$, that grows with the angle traversed. Again, the presence of the Higgs field does not contribute directly to the secular term and consequently to perihelion precession. Only through the deviation of $`b\left(r\right)`$ from Schwarzschild will the prediction of the conformal theory differ from general relativity.

## V Numerical Solution

Finally we present a numerical solution of the Weyl field equations and the scalar field equation of motion that has been carried out over both the interior and exterior domains, with boundary condition matching at the limb of the source, a prototypical sun which is presumed static and spherically symmetric. The exterior domain of the numerical solution has been extended in fine resolution to a radius of 60 AU, and in coarser resolution to further radius. The simple solar model used to perform these solutions was a polytrope of order three, and the equations were solved for the metric coefficient $`b`$ and the scalar field $`S`$, with the metric coefficient $`a`$ removed by coordinate and conformal transformations. The fermion field was handled by following the averaging procedure used in  and solving in terms of generic fermion number density and pressure. The main methods of solution were Runge-Kutta integrations and Newton-Raphson relaxations.

Boundary conditions at the limb of the source were provided by requiring compatibility with observation. For the metric field, the Schwarzschild solution is known to be very accurate in the inner solar system for light deflection and precession observations, so the metric field was required to match well with the Schwarzschild solution at the limb of the sun. The scalar field has it’s value normalised to one at this point. The limb gradient of the scalar field can be limited in magnitude by compatibility with existing observations, or a more specific value can be produced by reference to the anomalous motion of the Pioneer spacecraft. If the observed acceleration of these spacecraft is accurate (and a transponder signal should be the most sensitive test we have of these effects to date), the scalar field gradient corresponding to the observed acceleration at 40 AU would be $`S^{}10^{24}`$ m<sup>-2</sup>. The exterior numerical solution gives a corresponding limb value of $`S^{}10^{19}`$ m<sup>-2</sup>.

With these boundary conditions in hand, a consistent interior/exterior numerical solution was produced (Figures 2, 3). The interior metric field merges well into an exterior solution of the Schwarzschild form. The scalar field increases across the interior domain before smoothly assuming a very slight gradient as required in the exterior region. Newton-Raphson iterations on the exterior solution near the source show that the metric field produced is in agreement with Schwarzschild to one part in $`10^{15}`$, even in the presence of a scalar field. From our arguments given above, we would conclude that theory passes the standard solar system tests to this accuracy.

The far-field (30 – 60 AU) behaviour of the fields is also satisfactory. The metric field continues to agree with Schwarzschild to good order, up to the accuracy limits of the numerical methods. The scalar field assumes a very slight and asymptotically decreasing gradient which varies very slowly across the exterior domain. The results are very similar to the restricted analytic solution described above, but with the inclusion of the metric field in the mass term resulting in a slower variation of the scalar field gradient. It is expected that with improving accuracy of the far-field methods that the scalar field will vary more slowly again.

The values that the constants of the theory assumed with these boundary conditions were $`\alpha 3.5\times 10^{15}`$ and $`\lambda 10^{45}`$. The value of $`\alpha `$ is set through the boundary conditions, and that of $`\lambda `$ by the stability of the solution at large radius, larger values producing runaway behaviour in the fields at large radius due to the $`\lambda S^3`$ term in the equations.

## VI Planetary Motion

The form we have found for the scalar field shows a radially and rapidly decreasing gradient in the vicinity of the source. This feature could have relevance as to why anomalous accelerations are not observed for planetary bodies, at least to the accuracy of ranging experiments to date (; see also comments in ). While it is not yet known how the scalar field sourced by more than one body would be configured, we expect that a secondary body, such as a planet, would superpose a similar characteristic well upon the background field produced by the primary. Such a superposition may well result in an average of the scalar field gradient over the volume of the planet that is less than the single-source field gradient. Thus the constituent particles of the planet could, on average, experience less of an anomalous radial acceleration towards the sun than they would if the rest of the planet were not present. In this respect a planet is unlike a spacecraft, which would not appreciably affect the scalar field in its own vicinity.

## VII Conclusion

In this paper we have investigated the theory of conformal gravity with dynamical mass generation, as originally presented by Mannheim . The theory has been presented here in a logically consistent format that clarifies some areas in the construction of the theory that have been confused in the past. In particular it has been emphasized here that since conformal gravity not only is compatible with dynamical mass generation, but also requires it to be predictive, the scalar Higgs field is an integral part of the theory and cannot be ignored. From this framework, analytic and numerical results have been extracted. The import of these results is that it appears that conformal gravity with dynamical mass generation can reproduce the gravitational effects within the solar system, including the possible Pioneer spacecraft accelerations, while still satisfying the standard solar system tests. This successful outcome was made possible through the inclusion of the scalar field required for dynamical mass generation. Solutions of the full system of equations have not been obtained before.


text:
# New analytic running coupling in spacelike and timelike regions

## I Introduction

The description of hadron dynamics in the infrared (IR) region remains an urgent problem of contemporary elementary particle theory. The asymptotic freedom in quantum chromodynamics (QCD) enables one to apply the standard perturbative approach at large momenta transferred. However, a number of phenomena (for example, quark confinement, nonvanishing vacuum expectation values, etc.) are beyond such calculations. Moreover, the use of perturbation theory results in known unphysical singularities in the IR region (for example, the ghost pole appears in the expression for the running coupling).

Recently a new model for the QCD analytic running coupling has been proposed . The basic idea of this model is unification of the analytic approach to QCD  with the renormalization group (RG) formalism for recovering proper analytic properties of the theory. An obvious advantage of the new analytic running coupling (NARC) is that it incorporates IR enhancement with asymptotic freedom behavior in a single expression and does not contain additional parameters. In Refs.  it was shown explicitly that the new analytic running coupling, without invoking any additional assumptions, leads to the quark-antiquark potential rising at large distances. In addition, a reasonable estimation of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$ was obtained there. The absence of unphysical singularities in the physical region of positive***In this paper a metric with the signature $`(1,1,1,1)`$ is used, so that $`q^2>0`$ corresponds to a spacelike momentum transfer. $`q^2`$ is also an appealing feature of NARC.

The objective of this paper is to construct a consistent continuation of the new analytic running coupling to the timelike region and to elaborate the method for determination of the coefficients of “analytized” RG equation (i.e., RG equation with recovered proper analytic properties, see Sec. II). The latter enables one to take consistently into account the higher loop contributions to the new analytic running coupling in the spacelike region.

The layout of the paper is as follows. In Sec. II the new analytic running coupling is considered in the spacelike region. The method for determining the coefficients of the analytized RG equation is proposed that enables one to take consistently into account the higher loop contributions to NARC. By invoking the asymptotic freedom condition the expression for the new analytic running coupling, independent of the normalization point, is obtained. In Sec. III the continuation of the new analytic running coupling to the timelike region is constructed. It is shown that distinction between the corresponding values of NARC in the spacelike and timelike regions becomes valuable in the intermediate energy region. This fact may be important when extracting the QCD running coupling from experimental data. Further, it is shown explicitly that for the timelike NARC the respective $`\beta `$ function is proportional to the spectral density, thus confirming the hypothesis due to Schwinger. In Sec. IV the results on studies of the new model for the QCD analytic running coupling are briefly summarized. In the framework of the approach developed the description of the inclusive $`\tau `$ lepton decay is performed. The obtained value of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$ fairly well agrees with its previous estimations. This implies the applicability of the new analytic running coupling to description of the both typical perturbative and intrinsically nonperturbative processes of quantum chromodynamics. In the Conclusion (Sec. V) the obtained results are formulated in a compact way, and further studies in this approach are outlined.

## II New analytic running coupling in the spacelike region

In paper  a new model for the QCD analytic running coupling has been proposed. The model is based on the unification of the so-called analytic approach to QCD  with the RG formalism. Obvious advantage of the new analytic running coupling is incorporation, in a single expression, of IR enhancementIt is worth noting here that such a behavior of invariant charge follows from the analysis of the Schwinger-Dyson equations . and asymptotic freedom. Remarkably, the model contains no additional parameters. Similarly to the standard case, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$ remains the only characterizing parameter of the theory. By making use of the NARC in Refs.  the confining interquark potential was explicitly derived without invoking any additional assumptions, the acceptable estimation of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$ being obtained. It is also to be noted that NARC is free of unphysical singularities in the physical region $`q^2>0`$.

According to Ref. , in the spacelike (Euclidean) region $`q^2>0`$ the new analytic running coupling at the $`\mathrm{}`$-loop level, $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)`$, is defined as the solution of the analytized RG equation

$$\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\left[{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{\text{an}}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)\right]}{d\mathrm{ln}q^2}=\left\{\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}1}{}}B_j\left[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_\text{s}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)\right]^{j+1}\right\}_{\text{}\text{an}}.$$
(1)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_\text{s}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)`$ is the $`\mathrm{}`$-loop perturbative running coupling, $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }(q^2)\alpha (q^2)\beta _0/(4\pi )`$. The curly brackets $`\left\{S(q^2)\right\}_{\text{an}}`$ mean the “analytization” (i.e., the recovering of proper analytic properties in the $`q^2`$ variable) of the function $`S(q^2)`$ by making use of the Källén-Lehmann spectral representation

$$\left\{S(q^2)\right\}_{\text{}\text{an}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\varrho (\sigma )}{\sigma +q^2}𝑑\sigma ,$$
(2)
where the spectral density $`\varrho (\sigma )`$ is determined by the initial (perturbative) expression for $`S(q^2)`$:

$$\varrho (\sigma )=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim}\left[S(\sigma i\epsilon )S(\sigma +i\epsilon )\right].$$
(3)
In addition, according to the model proposed in  the solution of the RG equation (1) before analytization must be the perturbative running coupling at the respective loop level. In other words, at any loop level the relationship

$$\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\left[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_\text{s}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)\right]}{d\mathrm{ln}q^2}=\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}1}{}}B_j\left[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_\text{s}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)\right]^{j+1}$$
(4)
holds. It is this condition that enables one to determine consistently the coefficients $`B_j`$ on the right-hand side of Eq. (1).

For this purpose let us consider the standard RG equation for the invariant charge $`g(\mu )`$ (see, e.g., Refs. )

$$\frac{1}{g(\mu )}\frac{dg(\mu )}{d\mathrm{ln}\mu }=\beta \left(g(\mu )\right).$$
(5)
For the $`\beta `$ function the perturbative expansion

$$\beta \left(g(\mu )\right)=\left\{\beta _0\left[\frac{g^2(\mu )}{16\pi ^2}\right]+\beta _1\left[\frac{g^2(\mu )}{16\pi ^2}\right]^2+\mathrm{}\right\}$$
(6)
takes place, where $`\beta _0=112n_\text{f}/3`$, $`\beta _1=10238n_\text{f}/3`$, and $`n_\text{f}`$ is the number of active quarks. Further, Eq. (5) can be rewritten in the following form:

$$\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\left[g^2(\mu )\right]}{d\mathrm{ln}\mu ^2}=\beta \left(g(\mu )\right).$$
(7)
Introducing the standard notations $`\alpha _\text{s}(\mu ^2)=g^2(\mu )/(4\pi )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_\text{s}(\mu ^2)=\alpha _\text{s}(\mu ^2)\beta _0/(4\pi )`$, Eq. (7) at the $`\mathrm{}`$-loop level can be reduced to Eq. (4)

$$\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\left[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_\text{s}^{(\mathrm{})}(\mu ^2)\right]}{d\mathrm{ln}\mu ^2}=\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}1}{}}\beta _j\left[\frac{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_\text{s}^{(\mathrm{})}(\mu ^2)}{\beta _0}\right]^{j+1},$$
(8)
if one puts $`B_j=\beta _j/(\beta _0)^{j+1}`$. Actually, in this case Eq. (4) is nothing but the standard perturbative RG equation that defines the invariant charge.

Thus, in the spacelike region the new analytic running coupling at the $`\mathrm{}`$-loop level $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)`$ is defined as the solution of the equation

$$\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\left[{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{\text{an}}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)\right]}{d\mathrm{ln}q^2}=\left\{\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}1}{}}B_j\left[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_\text{s}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)\right]^{j+1}\right\}_{\text{}\text{an}},B_j=\frac{\beta _j}{\beta _0^{j+1}}.$$
(9)
At the one-loop level Eq. (9) can be integrated explicitly with the result

$${}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(1)}(q^2)=\frac{4\pi }{\beta _0}\frac{z1}{z\mathrm{ln}z},z=\frac{q^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}.$$
(10)
At the higher loop levels there is only the integral representation for the new analytic running coupling. One should note from the very beginning, that the solution of Eq. (9) is determined up to a constant factor due to the logarithmic derivative on its left-hand side. In our previous studies this problem has been eliminated by normalization of the solution to Eq. (9) on its value at a point $`q_0^2`$ (see, e.g., Eq. (2) in Ref. ). In this paper we propose to remove this ambiguity in a more physical way. Indeed, this can be easily achieved by invoking the condition of the asymptotic freedom, namely $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)\alpha _\text{s}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)`$ when $`q^2\mathrm{}`$ (in fact, it has already been employed at the one-loop level, see Eq. (10)). Then, involving the similar condition $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2){}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(1)}(q^2)`$ when $`q^2\mathrm{}`$, we obtain the following integral representation for the $`\mathrm{}`$-loop new analytic running coupling (see Ref.  for the details):

$${}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)=\frac{4\pi }{\beta _0}\frac{z1}{z\mathrm{ln}z}\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Delta }^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma )\mathrm{ln}\left(1+\frac{\sigma }{z}\right)\frac{d\sigma }{\sigma }\right],$$
(11)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma )=^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma )^{(1)}(\sigma )`$, and

$`^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi i}}\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim}{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}1}{}}}B_j\{\left[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_\text{s}^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma i\epsilon )\right]^{j+1}`$ (13)
$`\left[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_\text{s}^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma +i\epsilon )\right]^{j+1}\},\sigma 0.`$
It is worth noting here that for the NARC the Källén-Lehmann representation holds

$${}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(\mathrm{})}(q^2)=\frac{4\pi }{\beta _0}_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma )}{\sigma +z}𝑑\sigma ,z=\frac{q^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2},$$
(14)
where the spectral density at the one-loop level is

$${}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(1)}(\sigma )=\left(1+\frac{1}{\sigma }\right)\frac{1}{\mathrm{ln}^2\sigma +\pi ^2},$$
(15)
and the $`\mathrm{}`$-loop spectral density $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma )`$ is defined below (see Eq. (20)). Figure 1 shows the new analytic running coupling (11) computed at the one-, two-, and three-loop levels. It is clear from these curves that NARC possesses a quite good loop stability (for the properties of the new analytic running coupling see Refs. ).

An important merit of the new analytic running coupling is that it allows one to obtain the confining quark-antiquark ($`q\overline{q}`$) potential without invoking any additional assumptions . Besides, the interquark potential contains no adjustable parameters (it depends solely on the distance $`r`$ and the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$), and at small distances it has the standard behavior prescribed by the asymptotic freedom. Comparison of the $`q\overline{q}`$ potential generated by the NARC  with the phenomenological (Cornell) potential and with the lattice simulation data , as well as the estimation of the gluon condensate value on the base of NARC give a consistent valueThis estimation corresponds to the one-loop level with three active quarks. of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$ : $`\mathrm{\Lambda }600\pm 90`$ MeV. This can be considered as an evidence of the fact that the new analytic running coupling adequately takes into account the nonperturbative nature of quantum chromodynamics (see also Ref. ).

## III New analytic running coupling in the timelike region

In the previous section the definition of the new analytic running coupling in the spacelike region has been given. However, for consistent description of a number of QCD processes (for example, $`\tau `$ lepton decay or $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation to hadrons) one has to use the continuation of the running coupling to the timelike region.

In Ref.  the procedure of continuation of the invariant charge from the spacelike region to the timelike region (and vise versa) was elaborated by making use of the dispersion relation for the Adler $`D`$ function. In particular, if the running coupling in the spacelike region is $`\alpha (q^2)`$, then its consistent continuation to the timelike region is defined by the integral

$$\widehat{\alpha }(s)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_{s+i\epsilon }^{si\epsilon }\frac{d\zeta }{\zeta }\alpha (\zeta ),s=q^2>0,$$
(16)
where the integration contour goes from the point $`s+i\epsilon `$ to the point $`si\epsilon `$ and lies in the region of analyticity of the function $`\alpha (\zeta )`$. Here and further the running coupling in the spacelike region is denoted by $`\alpha (q^2)`$ and in the timelike region by $`\widehat{\alpha }(s)`$.

In order to simplify Eq. (16) let us choose the integration contour in the following way. From the point $`s+i\epsilon `$ the integration path goes in a parallel way with the real axis to infinity, then along the circle with an infinitely large radius it goes counter-clockwise to the point $`(\mathrm{}i\epsilon )`$, and then it goes in a parallel way with the real axis to the point $`si\epsilon `$. As a result, the continuation of the one-loop new analytic running coupling $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(1)}(q^2)`$ to the timelike region is given by

$${}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\widehat{\alpha }_{\text{an}}^{(1)}(s)=\frac{4\pi }{\beta _0}_{s/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}^{\mathrm{}}{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(1)}(\zeta )\frac{d\zeta }{\zeta }$$
(17)
with the spectral density $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(1)}(\zeta )`$ defined in Eq. (15).

The account of higher loop corrections leads to significant technical complications. So, at the $`\mathrm{}`$-loop level for the new analytic running coupling in the timelike region the integral representation of the same form takes place:

$${}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\widehat{\alpha }_{\text{an}}^{(\mathrm{})}(s)=\frac{4\pi }{\beta _0}_{s/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}^{\mathrm{}}{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(\mathrm{})}(\zeta )\frac{d\zeta }{\zeta },$$
(18)
where

$`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(\mathrm{})}(\zeta )`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(1)}(\zeta )\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma )\mathrm{ln}\left|1{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma }{\zeta }}\right|{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma }{\sigma }}\right]`$ (20)
$`\times \left[\mathrm{cos}\psi ^{(\mathrm{})}(\zeta )+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}\zeta }{\pi }}\mathrm{sin}\psi ^{(\mathrm{})}(\zeta )\right],`$
$`^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma )`$ is defined in Eq. (13), and

$$\psi ^{(\mathrm{})}(\zeta )=\pi _\zeta ^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Delta }^{(\mathrm{})}(\sigma )\frac{d\sigma }{\sigma }.$$
(21)
In Eq. (20) the principle value of the integral is assumed.

It is interesting to note here that, in our approach, a simple relation holds between the $`\beta `$ function, corresponding to the running coupling in the timelike region (Eq. (18)), and the relevant spectral density:

$$\beta \left(\widehat{\alpha }(s)\right)\frac{d\left[{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\widehat{\alpha }_{\text{an}}^{(\mathrm{})}(s)\right]}{d\left[\mathrm{ln}s\right]}=\frac{4\pi }{\beta _0}{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(\mathrm{})}(s).$$
(22)
Thus the $`\beta `$ function in question proves to be proportional to the spectral density $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(\mathrm{})}(s)`$. Obviously, this result completely agrees with the attempts, originated by Schwinger , to find a direct physical interpretation of the $`\beta `$ function (the so-called Schwinger hypothesis, see Refs. ).

The plots of the functions $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(1)}(q^2)`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\widehat{\alpha }_{\text{an}}^{(1)}(s)`$ are shown in Fig. 2. At large values of the arguments these expressions have identical behavior prescribed by the asymptotic freedom $`\alpha (q^2)1/\mathrm{ln}|z|`$. However, for intermediate energies the difference between these couplings is rather valuable. The ratio of the one-loop new analytic running coupling in the spacelike region $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\alpha _{\text{an}}^{(1)}(q^2)`$ to its continuation to the timelike region $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\widehat{\alpha }_{\text{an}}^{(1)}(q^2)`$ is presented in Fig. 3. It follows from this figure that the deviation increases when approaching the IR region, and, in particular, rises up to about $`10\%`$ when $`\sqrt{s}10`$ GeV. Apparently, this circumstance should be taken into account when extracting the QCD running coupling from experimental data.

## IV Discussion

The basic idea of the analytic approach to quantum field theory can be treated as an attempt to recover explicitly the proper analytic properties in the $`q^2`$ variable for the relevant physical quantities. A concrete realization of this approach may be different. For example, in the original model by Shirkov and Solovtsov  the analytization procedure is applied to the perturbative invariant charge. Unlike this proposal, our new model for the QCD analytic running coupling  seeks to recover the proper analytic properties of the RG equation. More precisely, the new analytic running coupling is derived as the solution of the RG equation with the $`\beta `$ function “improved” by the analytization procedure (see also Refs.  for the details). From the general point of view, in this case one can anticipate new properties of the invariant charge. Indeed, in our model there is the IR enhancement of the new analytic running coupling, while the invariant charge due to Shirkov and Solovtsov tends to a finite value in the infrared limit (the IR freezing of the running coupling). It is this property of our model that ultimately leads to the confining quark-antiquark potential. Further, the behavior of the NARC in the UV region is completely determined by the asymptotic freedom in QCD. Thus, in our model  the IR enhancement and the UV asymptotic freedom are involved in a single expression for the new analytic running coupling without introducing any additional parameters into the theory. It is important to emphasize here that such a behavior of the invariant charge is in agreement with the Schwinger-Dyson equations (see Ref. ).

Let us turn now to the perturbative phenomena. One of the QCD processes, the most sensitive to the low energy behavior of the invariant charge, is the inclusive semileptonic branching ratio of the $`\tau `$ lepton decay, $`R_\tau `$. Therefore, we address the consideration of this process restricting ourselves, for simplicity, to the one loop level.

We proceed from the nonstrange part of the $`R_\tau `$ ratio associated with the vector quark currents

$$R_{\tau ,\text{V}}=\frac{N_\text{c}}{2}|V_{\text{ud}}|^2S_{\text{EW}}\left(1+\delta _{\text{QCD}}\right),$$
(23)
where $`N_\text{c}=3`$ is the number of quark colors, $`|V_{\text{ud}}|=0.9735\pm 0.0008`$ denotes the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element , $`S_{\text{EW}}=1.0194\pm 0.0040`$ is the electroweak factor , and $`\delta _{\text{QCD}}`$ is the QCD correction (see, e.g., Refs.  and references therein). A recent experimental measurement of the ratio (23) by ALEPH Collaboration gave  $`R_{\tau ,\text{V}}=1.775\pm 0.017`$.

In accordance with the standard prescription the one-loop QCD correction in our approach is determined by the integral

$$\delta _{\text{QCD}}=\frac{2}{\pi }_{4m^2}^{M_\tau ^2}\frac{ds}{M_\tau ^2}\left(1\frac{s}{M_\tau ^2}\right)^2\left(1+2\frac{s}{M_\tau ^2}\right){}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\widehat{\alpha }_{\text{an}}^{(1)}(s),$$
(24)
where $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\widehat{\alpha }_{\text{an}}^{(1)}(s)`$ is the new analytic running coupling in the timelike region (17), and $`m`$ is the light quark mass, with its world average value $`m=(4.25\pm 1.75)`$ MeV . It is worth noting here that there is no need to involve the contour integration in Eq. (24), since NARC (17) does not contain unphysical singularities in the region $`s>0`$. In other words, the integration in Eq. (24) can be performed in a straightforward way. By introducing the notations $`x=s/M_\tau ^2`$, $`x_0=4m^2/M_\tau ^2`$, and $`c_0=(2x_02x_0^3+x_0^4)`$, one can represent Eq. (24) in a form convenient for integration

$`\delta _{\text{QCD}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{\beta _0}}{\displaystyle _{x_0}^1}\left(2x2x^3+x^4+c_0\right){}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(1)}\left(x{\displaystyle \frac{M_\tau ^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{dx}{x}}`$ (26)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{\beta _0}}(1+c_0){\displaystyle _{M_\tau ^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}^{\mathrm{}}}{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(1)}(\sigma ){\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma }{\sigma }},`$
where the spectral density $`{}_{}{}^{\text{N}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{}^{(1)}(\sigma )`$ is defined in Eq. (15).

For the value of $`R_{\tau ,\text{V}}`$ given above  we obtain the estimation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=(560\pm 70)`$ MeV for two active quarks (the uncertainty accounts the errors in the values of $`R_{\tau ,\text{V}}`$, $`|V_{\text{ud}}|`$, $`S_{\text{EW}}`$, and $`m`$). However, in order to compare this result with earlier estimations, one should continue it to the region of three active quarks. This gives the value $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=(517\pm 70)`$ MeV that perfectly agrees with the previous estimations. We remind that this value of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$ corresponds to the one-loop level with three active quarks.

Thus, in the framework of the model under consideration one succeeds in obtaining a consistent, with its previous estimations, value of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$ by making use of the experimental data on the inclusive $`\tau `$ lepton decay, the world average value of light quark mass being employed.

From all this we may infer that the new model for the QCD analytic running coupling substantially incorporates, in a consistent way, both perturbative (high energy) and nonperturbative (low energy) behavior of quantum chromodynamics.

## V Conclusion

This paper is a further development of the new model for the QCD analytic running coupling proposed in . This running coupling naturally arises under unification of the analytic approach to QCD with the RG formalism. The elaborated method for determination of the coefficients of the analytized RG equation enables one to take consistently into account the higher loop contributions to the new analytic running coupling. The invoking of the asymptotic freedom condition allows one to derive the expression for the NARC independent of the normalization point. The continuation of the new analytic running coupling to the timelike region is constructed. It is demonstrated that the difference between the respective values of the new analytic running coupling in the spacelike and timelike regions is considerable for intermediate energies. This fact seems to be important for extracting the running coupling from experimental data. It is shown that for the timelike new analytic running coupling the hypothesis due to Schwinger is confirmed. In the framework of the new model for the QCD analytic running coupling the description of the inclusive $`\tau `$ lepton decay is performed. The obtained value of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$ is in a good agreement with its previous estimations.

Thus, the application of the new analytic running coupling to the description of various physical phenomena (both, perturbative and intrinsically nonperturbative ones) gives a consistent estimation of the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\text{QCD}}`$. This fact, as well as the agreement of the IR behavior of the NARC with Schwinger-Dyson equations, and ability to obtain, without invoking any additional assumptions, the confining quark-antiquark potential, implies that the new model for the QCD analytic running coupling substantially incorporates, in a consistent way, both perturbative (high energy) and nonperturbative (low energy) behavior of quantum chromodynamics.

In further studies it would be useful to obtain simple explicit expressions which approximate the new analytic running coupling in the spacelike and timelike regions with account of the higher loop corrections.

###### Acknowledgements.

The author is grateful to Dr. I. L. Solovtsov for valuable discussions and useful comments and to Professor G. S. Bali for supplying the relevant data on the lattice calculations. The partial support of RFBR (Grant No. 00-15-96691) is appreciated.