text:
# The Mesonic Fluctuations and Corrections in the Chiral Symmetry Breaking Vacuum

## 1 Introduction

It is generally accepted that the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio (NJL)  model offers a simple scheme to study the mechanism of spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking. Most calculations in this model have been based on the mean-field approximation, i.e., quark self-energy in the leading order of $`1/N_c`$ expansion .

Recently, more interests are paid on the NJL model beyond mean-field approximation. The mesonic fluctuations are variously investigated in the bosonization formalism - and in the Feynman diagram formalism of $`1/N_c`$ expansion -.  and  in bosonization formalism using meson-loop expansion or saddle-point expanstion are equivalent to the self-consistent Feynman diagram formalism  in $`1/N_c`$ expansion, and the chiral symmetry of the NJL model can be preserved. While,  and  generalize the NJL model to the nonliear-sigma approach for description of chiral fluctuations, and the authors in  claimed that at $`N_c=3`$ the NJL model does not display spontaneous symmetry breaking dut to chiral fluctuations.

There are two different $`1/N_c`$ expansion schemes which can preserve chiral symmetry of the NJL model. One is the so-called ”strict” $`1/N_c`$ expansion scheme through iterating the quark self-energy at Hartree approximation  . The other is the self-consistent scheme with meson-loop expansion or saddle-point expansion, in which the next-to-leading order (NLO) contributions represent the mesonic quantum fluctuations around the classical stationary chiral symmetry breaking vacuum . In both schemes, the meson corrections to the mean-field approximation are included not only in the meson-loop contributions, but also in the one-quark-loop contributions through the corrected quark propagator.

In the above mentioned chiral symmetric schemes, emphasis is put on discussing the NLO or pure meson-loop contributions. However, to investigate whether chiral symmetry is restored in the vacuum, one should investigate the meson corrections to the mean-field approximation. In this paper we investigate not only the mesonic fluctuations around the classical vacuum, but also the mesonic corrections to the mean-field approximation in the chiral symmetric self-consistent scheme based on , we will exactly calculate the meson polarization function and the quark self-energy to the next-to-leading order in $`1/N_c`$ expansion. We will show that, by using the pole approximation for internal meson propagators, the $`1/N_c`$ expansion in the self-consistent scheme is also ”strict”. The momentum cut-off for quarks and mesons, i.e., $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_f`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M`$, have been introduced in non-covariant three-momentum regularization. The model parameters at different values of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M`$ have been determined by fitting the pion’s mass $`m_\pi =139MeV`$ and the pion’s decay constant $`f_\pi =93.2MeV`$ with an appropriate value of the current quark mass. The way to determine the parameters to the next-to-leading order here is different from that used in  and , where the parameters are fitted at leading order  or partialy at leading order .

## 2 Mean-field approximation

The two-flavor NJL model is defined through the Lagrangian density,

$`=\overline{\psi }(i\gamma ^\mu _\mu m_0)\psi +G[(\overline{\psi }\psi )^2+(\overline{\psi }i\gamma _5\stackrel{}{\tau }\psi )^2],`$ (1)
here $`G`$ is the effective coupling constant of dimension $`\mathrm{GeV}^2`$, $`m_0`$ is the current quark mass, assuming isospin degeneracy of $`u`$ and $`d`$ quarks, and $`\psi ,\overline{\psi }`$ are quark fields with flavor, colour and spinor indices suppressed.

The quark mass $`m_q^0`$ in mean-field approximation, i.e., in Hartree approximation, can be represented by

$`m_q^0=m_0+\mathrm{\Sigma }_H^0,`$ (2)
where $`m_0`$ is the current quark mass and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_H^0`$ is the quark self-energy of one-quark-loop contributions in mean-field approximation, which can be expressed as

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_H^0=8iG^0N_cN_fm_q^0{\displaystyle \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{1}{p^2(m_q^0)^2}}.`$ (3)
For quantities in mean-field approximation, we indicate them with a superscript ”$`0`$”.

The quark condensate calculated in mean-field approxiamtion has a simple relation with the quark self-energy

$`<\overline{q}q>^0={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_H^0}{4G^0}}.`$ (4)
Correspondingly, the meson polarization functions in random-phase approximation are

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_M^0(k)`$ $`=`$ $`4iN_cN_f{\displaystyle \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{1}{p^2(m_q^0)^2}}2iN_cN_f(k^24ϵ_M(m_q^0)^2)`$ (5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{1}{(p^2(m_q^0)^2)((p+k)^2(m_q^0)^2)}},`$
with $`M`$ refering to $`\pi `$ or $`\sigma `$, and $`ϵ_\pi =0`$ and $`ϵ_\sigma =1`$.

The NJL parameters in mean-field approximation can be fixed as $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_f=637.7MeV`$, and $`G^0\mathrm{\Lambda }_f^2=2.16`$, by choosing an appropriate current quark mass $`m_0=5.5MeV`$ and through fitting the pion’s mass $`m_\pi =139MeV`$ and decay constant $`f_\pi =93.2MeV`$. The corresponding quark mass is $`m_q^0=330MeV`$ and chiral condensate $`(<\overline{q}q>^0)^{1/3}=248MeV`$.

## 3 Mesonic fluctuations and corrections on chiral condensate

The chiral symmetric self-consistent scheme is described in details in   in effective action formalism and in  by using Feynman diagramatic method.

Including current quark mass $`m_0`$, the gap equation for quark mass can be expressed as

$`m_q=m_0+\mathrm{\Sigma }_H+\mathrm{\Sigma }^{fl},`$ (6)
where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_H`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{fl}`$ are the leading order (LO) and next-to-leading order (NLO) of quark self-enery in $`1/N_c`$ expansion, which can be read directly from the Feynman diagrams in Fig.1.

The expression of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_H`$ is the same as that of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_H^0`$, except that the quark mass $`m_q^0`$ in Eq. (3) should be replaced by $`m_q`$, which is the new saddle-point of the effective action including mesonic fluctuations  .

The NLO quark self-energy can be written directly from the diagrams in Fig.1

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{fl}=8GN_cN_fm_q{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4pd^4q}{(2\pi )^8}}[(iD_\pi (q))({\displaystyle \frac{3}{(p^2m_q^2)^2}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3q^2}{(p^2m_q^2)^2((p+q)^2m_q^2)}})+(iD_\sigma (q))({\displaystyle \frac{1}{(p^2m_q^2)^2}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{(p^2m_q^2)((p+q)^2m_q^2)}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^24m_q^2}{(p^2m_q^2)^2((p+q)^2m_q^2)}})],`$ (7)
where $`iD_M(q)`$ indicate the internal meson propagator, which is in random-phase-approximation, i.e., strings of single quark loops. At this position, it is necessary to note that in , the NLO quark self-energy is seperated into two parts: the first term of meson propagator in RPA and the remaining ring diagrams.

Evaluating quark loop and meson-loop integrals, one can get a simple relation between the quark condensate and the constituent quark mass $`m_q`$,

$`<\overline{q}q>=(<\overline{q}q>_H+<\overline{q}q>^{fl})={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_H+\mathrm{\Sigma }^{fl}}{4G}}.`$ (8)
The magnitude of the mesonic quantum fluctuations around the classical vacuum is defined as the ratio of the pure NLO contributions over the LO contributions

$`R_q^{fl}=\mathrm{\Sigma }^{fl}/\mathrm{\Sigma }_H,`$ (9)
which had been discussed carefully in .

And the mesonic corrections on the chiral condensate is defined as the difference between the value in and beyond mean-field approximation, i.e.

$`\delta <\overline{q}q>=(<\overline{q}q>)(<\overline{q}q>^0)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_H+\mathrm{\Sigma }^{fl}}{4G}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_H^0}{4G^0}},`$ (10)
and the ratio of mesonic corrections is

$`R_q^{cr}=\delta <\overline{q}q>/(<\overline{q}q>^0).`$ (11)
## 4 Mesonic fluctuations and corrections on pion polarization function

Because the sigma meson is heavy, it does not play an important role in vacuum, and the NLO contributions would not affect the properties of sigma meson. Here we only discuss the mesonic corrections on pion polarization function, and just simply choose $`m_\sigma 2m_q`$.

The pion polarization function $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi (k)`$ to next-to-leading order is shown in Fig. 1, and can be written as

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi (k)=\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(RPA)}(k)+\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{fl}(k),`$ (12)
where $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(RPA)}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{fl}`$ are leading and subleading contributions. The expression for $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(RPA)}`$ is the same as $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^0`$ except that the quark mass $`m_q^0`$ replaced by $`m_q`$. And the contributions of sub-leading order to pion polarization function include three diagrams,

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{fl}=\delta \mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(b)}+\delta \mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(c)}+\delta \mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(d)}.`$ (13)
Each diagram can be evaluated as following:

$`\delta \mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(b)}(k)=2N_cN_f{\displaystyle \underset{M=\pi ,\sigma }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^4qd^4p}{(2\pi )^8}(iD_M(q))}`$ (14)
$`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(p^2m_q^2)((p+qk)^2m_q^2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{((p+q)^2m_q^2)((pk)^2m_q^2)}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{k^2(q^2ϵ_M4m_q^2)}{(p^2m_q^2)((p+q)^2m_q^2)((pk)^2m_q^2)((p+qk)^2m_q^2)}}],`$
$`\delta \mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(c)}(k)=4N_cN_f{\displaystyle \underset{M=\pi ,\sigma }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^4qd^4p}{(2\pi )^8}\lambda _M(iD_M(q))}`$
$`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{((p+q)^2m_q^2)((pk)^2m_q^2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{k^2(q^2ϵ_M4m_q^2)}{(p^2m_q^2)^2((p+q)^2m_q^2)((pk)^2m_q^2)}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(p^2m_q^2)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2kq}{(p^2m_q^2)((p+q)^2m_q^2)((pk)^2m_q^2)}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{(p^2m_q^2)^2((pk)^2m_q^2)}}{\displaystyle \frac{(q^2ϵ_M4m_q^2)}{(p^2m_q^2)^2((p+q)^2m_q^2)}}],`$ (15)
with the degeneracy $`\lambda _\pi =3`$, $`\lambda _\sigma =1`$ and

$`\delta \mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(d)}(k)=i{\displaystyle \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi )^4}(iD_\pi (q))(iD_\sigma (qk))}`$
$`[{\displaystyle \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{8m_qN_cN_f(kq(p^2m_q^2))}{(p^2m_q^2)((p+q)^2m_q^2)((p+k)^2m_q^2)}}]^2.`$ (16)
The magnitude of mesonic fluctuations on pion polarization function is defined as the ratio of the next-to-leading order contribution over the leading order ones

$`R_\pi ^{fl}=\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{fl}/\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(RPA)}.`$ (17)
Considering mesonic fluctuations the corrections on pion polarization function is

$`\delta \mathrm{\Pi }_\pi =\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^0,`$ (18)
and the magnitude of mesonic corrections on pion polarization can be defined as

$`R_\pi ^{cr}=\delta \mathrm{\Pi }_\pi /\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^0.`$ (19)
At last, we should discuss the formalism of the internal meson propagators. It has been discussed in several papers that the $`1/N_c`$ expansion in the self-consistent scheme is not strict  . It has been pointed out that the exact next-to-leading order quark self-enargy includes higher order contributions because the RPA internal meson propagators include any higher order $`O(1/N_c^n)`$ contributions. In our calculations, we choose the internal meson propagators

$`iD_M(q)={\displaystyle \frac{2iG}{12G\mathrm{\Pi }_M^{(RPA)}(q)}}`$ (20)
in pole aprroximation

$`iD_M(q)=i{\displaystyle \frac{[g_{Mqq}^{(RPA)}(q)]^2}{q^2m_M^2}},`$ (21)
with the pion-quark-antiquark coupling constant

$`g_{Mqq}^{(RPA)}(q)=(\mathrm{\Pi }_M^{(RPA)}(q)/q^2)^2.`$ (22)
The internal meson propagators in pole approximation will be always in the order of $`O(1/N_c)`$, which ensure the $`1/N_c`$ expansion is ”strict” in the self-consistent scheme.

## 5 Numerical Results

Our numerical results are based on solving three equations, the gap equation for quark Eq.(6), the equation for pion mass

$`12G\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi (k^2=m_\pi ^2)=0,`$ (23)
where the pion polarization function $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi `$ is calculated completely without any approximation, and the equation for pion decay constant

$`{\displaystyle \frac{m_\pi ^2f_\pi }{g_{\pi qq}}}={\displaystyle \frac{m_0}{2G}},`$ (24)
where the total coupling constant $`g_{\pi qq}`$ is given by the residue of the total pion polarization at the pole

$`g_{\pi qq}^2=\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi /k^2|_{k^2=m_\pi ^2}.`$ (25)
To evaluate the integrals, we introduce two three-momentum cut-offs $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_f`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M`$ for quarks and mesons in the non-covariant regularization, in order that the fixed model parameters can also be used at finite temperature and density in the future studies. The three model parameters $`m_0`$, $`G`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_f`$ are determined varying with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M`$ by fitting the pion mass $`m_\pi =139MeV`$ and pion decay constant $`f_\pi =93.2MeV`$ and taking an appropriate current quark mass $`m_0=5.5MeV`$.

Different from  and , we did not use the leading order of the Gell-Mann-Oakes-Renner (GOR) relations

$$m_0<\overline{q}q>=m_\pi ^2f_\pi ^2+O(m_\pi ^4)+\mathrm{}$$
(26)
as a constraint, because we did not use external moentum expansion for pions in our calculations. In addition, we did not use chiral expansion for pion mass and pion decay constant. As for the way to determine the model parameters in the calculations to the next-to-leading order, we don’t think it is self-consistent to fit the parameters at  or partially at  leading order.

Our numerical results are shown in Fig.2 and Fig.3 as a function of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q`$ . It is noticed that our results always start at about $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q=1`$. This is because for any value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M`$, the solutions of $`m_q`$ satisfies the relation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q>1`$.

In Fig. 2.a, the total (solid circles) and LO (stars) quark condensate, $`<\overline{q}q>^{1/3}`$ and $`<\overline{q}q>_H^{1/3}`$, are plotted as a function of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q`$, the value at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q=0`$ corresponds to the mean-field aprroximation $`(<\overline{q}q>^0)^{1/3}`$. In Fig.2.b, the magnitude of mesonic fluctuations $`R_q^{fl}`$ (stars) and mesonic corrections $`R_q^{cr}`$ (solid circles) to quark condensate are plotted as a function of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q`$.

In Fig. 3.a, the total (solid circles) and LO (stars) pion polarization function, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi (m_\pi ^2)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^{(RPA)}(m_\pi ^2)`$, are plotted as a function of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q`$, and the value at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q=0`$ is the pion polarization function in mean-field approximation $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\pi ^0(m_\pi ^2)`$. And the magnitude of mesonic fluctuations $`R_\pi ^{fl}`$ (stars) and mesonic corrections $`R_\pi ^{cr}`$ (solid circles) on pion polarization function are plotted as a function of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q`$ in Fig.3.b.

It is found that in the region $`1<\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q<2.3`$ with $`270MeV<m_q<440MeV`$ and $`270MeV<\mathrm{\Lambda }_M<1000MeV`$, both the LO and total quark condensate and pion polarization function are smaller than their mean-field values, which is refelcted in the negative meson corrections. Here the meson corrections reducing the mean-field quark condensate agree with the results in Fig.7 of .

The mesonic fluctuations, i.e., the pure NLO contributions of the chiral condensate and pion polarization function can be characterized by the meson-momentum cut-off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M`$, larger $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M`$ results in larger meson-loop contibutions. The NLO contributions are very small till $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q=1.5`$ with $`m_q=m_q^0=330MeV`$, then increase fast. When $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q>2.3`$, corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M>1000MeV`$, the mesonic fluctuations are larger than $`40\%`$, which means that the $`1/N_c`$ expansion around the stationary classical vacuum could not be used any more in this case. This is reasonable for only scalar and pseudo-scalar mesons involved. It is noticed that the NLO contributions enhancing the LO quark condensate is the same as that in  and .

However, the negative mesonic corrections of the chiral condensate and pion polarization function do not decrease monotonously with the increasing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q`$, they reach the minimum $`35\%`$ and $`40\%`$ at about $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q=2`$ with $`m_q=370MeV`$, then increase fast. The reason is that the meson corrections to the mean-field approximation include two parts: the pure meson-loop or NLO contributions and the deviation of the one-quark-loop from the mean-field calculation with the quark mass $`m_q^0`$. When $`1<\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q<1.5`$, corresponding to $`m_q<m_q^0`$, the pure meson-loop contributions are negative but very small, and the meson corrections come only from the change of quark mass in the one-quark-loop part. When $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q>1.5`$, corresponding to $`m_q>m_q^0`$, the pure meson-loop contributions are contrary to the contributions from the deviation of the one-quark-loop contributions. At about $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q=2.3`$, the two parts cancel to each other completely, and the meson corrections vanish.

It is the suppresion from the LO contributions and the enhancement from the NLO contributions, that the quark condensate in Fig.2 $`a`$ and the pion polarization function in Fig.3 $`a`$ do not decrease continuously with increasing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M/m_q`$. In , the authors claim that chiral symmetry will restore in vacuum by quantum fluctuations. One reason to get this strange conclusion is the lack of meson-loop contribution in the calculations in . This is also pointed out in .

It is necessary to point out that the cancellation between the NLO contributions and the deviation of one-quark-loop contributions from the mean-field approximation is not the same as the cancellation between the exchange term and the remaining ring diagrams in . In the latter case, the meson-loop contributions to quark self-energy are seperated into two parts, the exchange diagram and the ring diagram. It is found that the two contributions are contrary, and the exchange term is dominant, which is very important to ensure that the NLO contribution is positive to the LO values. Our cancellation is also not the same as the cancellation between the two NLO diagrams in , where the cancellation induces the NLO contribtions to LO are very small. The cancellation inside the NLO contributions in  and  can not reflect the convergence of the total mesonic corrections to the mean-field approximation, because the mesonic corrections is also included in the one-quark-loop diagram due to the change of quark mass.

## 6 Conclusions

In conclusion, the magnitude of mesonic fluctuations and their corresponding corrections on chiral condensate and pion polarization function are investigated in a self-consistent scheme by exactly calculating the Feynman diagrams to next-to-leading order of $`1/N_c`$ expansion.

It is found that the magnitude of the mesonic fluctuations around the classical vacuum, i.e., the pure meson-loop contributions, can be characterized by the meson-momentum cut-off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M`$, the larger $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M`$, the larger mesonic fluctuations. The NLO contributions enhance the LO values at the stationary saddle-point. However, the LO contributions reduce the values in the mean-field approximation. The two contributions to the mean-field approximation are contrary and cancel to each other.

When $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M>1000MeV`$, the mesonic fluctuations will be larger than $`40\%`$, which means that the meson-loop expansion or $`1/N_c`$ expansion could not be used any more. In the case of only scalar and pseudo-scalar mesons involved, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_M<1000MeV`$ is reasonable, otherwise, heavier vector mesons should be considered.

Even though we can not answer the question how much the magnitude of the mesonic fluctuations and corrections are, because the model parameters are not uniquely determined, we can conclude that the cancellation between the NLO contributions and the one-quark-loop with quark mass deviation from the mean-field value induces an appropriate mesonic corrections to the mean-field approximation, and no chiral symmetry restoration or instabilities of the vacuum is found.

## Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by the NSFC under Grant No. 19925519 and by the Major State Basic Research Development Program under Contract No. G2000077407.


format: text

text:
# TeV Neutrinos and GeV Photons from Shock Breakout in Supernovae

## Physical parameters at shock breakout.

When the radiation-dominated shock reaches an optical depth lower than unity, radiation can no longer couple to the gas and so the shock becomes viscous. This occurs very close to the surface radius of the progenitor star, $`R_{}`$. For the high temperatures of interest, the opacity is dominated by Thomson scattering, and the mass of a shell of optical depth $`\tau `$ located ahead of the shock is given by

$$M=4\pi R_{}^2\frac{\mu m_p}{\sigma _T}\tau =1.8\times 10^5R_{,13.5}^2\tau M_{},$$
(1)
where $`R_{,13.5}(R_{}/10^{13.5}`$ cm$`)=1`$ reflects the characteristic radius of a RSG progenitor. As mentioned above, we ignore rarer, more compact progenitors, such as blue supergiants for which $`R_{,13.5}=0.1`$, since the shell mass at a fixed $`\tau `$, and hence the energy output in high-energy neutrinos and photons, are smaller by a factor $`10^2`$ in them compared to RSGs. Using the analytic approximations of Matzner & Mckee  to describe the outer envelope structure, we find that the mass density of gas at the RSG surface is

$$\rho =0.54\times 10^{10}\tau ^{3/5}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3,$$
(2)
and the shell thickness is $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1.1\times 10^{11}\tau ^{2/5}\mathrm{cm}`$.

The shock velocity at breakout is $`v_s10^9\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (e.g. ), corresponding to an ion temperature of

$$T_i=\frac{3}{16}\mu v_s^2=1.0\times 10^5v_{s,9}^2\mathrm{eV},$$
(3)
where $`\mu =m_p/2`$ is the mean atomic mass per particle for a plasma in which the thermal energy is shared equally between protons and electrons. If the shock is radiation–dominated, the radiation temperature is approximately given by the relation $`aT_r^4\rho v_s^2`$, i.e.

$$T_r30\rho _{10}^{1/4}v_{s,9}^{1/2}\mathrm{eV},$$
(4)
where $`\rho _{10}=(\rho /10^{10}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3)`$.

## Viscous shock structure.

The ion-ion, ion-electron, and electron-electron collision rates are given by

$$\nu _{ii}3\rho _{10}T_{i,5}^{3/2}\mathrm{s}^1,$$
(5)
$$\nu _{ie}10^3\rho _{10}\times \{\begin{array}{cc}6T_{i,5}^{3/2}\mathrm{s}^1,\hfill & \text{if }T_e<m_eT_i/m_p\text{;}\hfill \\ 2T_{e,2}^{3/2}\mathrm{s}^1,\hfill & \text{otherwise,}\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
$$\nu _{ee}10^4\rho _{10}T_{e,4}^{3/2}\mathrm{s}^1.$$
(7)
Throughout this Letter, we use the notation $`T_{\alpha ,x}=(T_\alpha /10^x`$ eV$`)`$ to denote the temperature of component $`\alpha `$ ($`=i`$ for ions, $`e`$ for electrons, or $`r`$ for radiation) of the plasma. The collisional energy loss of ions is dominated by ion-ion collisions once the electrons are heated to a temperature $`T_e0.07T_i`$.

The electrons cool by Compton scattering and Bremsstrahlung emission. Compton scattering dominates for $`T_e10^2`$ eV, and provides a cooling rate of $`\nu _{\mathrm{Comp}}=(8\sigma _T/3m_ec)aT_r^4=8T_{r,1.5}^4\mathrm{s}^1`$. The electron temperature is determined by the balance between heating and cooling, $`\nu _{ie}T_i\nu _{\mathrm{Comp}}T_e`$, yielding a post-shock electron temperature

$$T_{e+}3\times 10^4(T_{i,5}\rho _{10})^{2/5}T_{r,1.5}^{8/5}\mathrm{eV}.$$
(8)
At this temperature, the ion-electron collision rate is

$$\nu _{ie+}0.4T_{i,5}^{3/5}\rho _{10}^{2/5}T_{r,1.5}^{12/5}\mathrm{s}^1.$$
(9)
Based on Eqs. (5)–(9), we conclude that the ion kinetic energy dissipation is dominated by ion-ion collisions, leading to a shock front width $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{s,ii}\nu _{ii}^1v_s=3\times 10^8\rho _{10}^1`$ cm. The electrons are heated by the ions to a temperature $`T_{e+}30\mathrm{keV}`$ which is lower by a factor of a few than the ion temperature, $`T_i100\mathrm{keV}`$. Behind the shock, the electrons cool by Compton scattering, but their temperature is maintained at $`T_eT_{e+}`$ over a shell of width $`\nu _{ie}^1v_s10^9\rho _{10}^{2/5}`$ cm, due to their coupling to the ions. Over a larger length scale, both the electrons and ions cool below their post shock temperature. The electrons maintain a local thermodynamic equilibrium, since they are heated to $`T_e0.07T_i`$ over a length scale $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{s,ii}`$ and subsequently $`\nu _{ee}\nu _{ie}`$.

Our results agree with the numerical simulations of Klein & Chevalier  for a RSG progenitor, who concluded that a collisional shock is formed at $`\tau 1`$ where $`T_r10`$ eV. Klein & Chevalier derived a post-shock temperature of $`10^4`$ eV, but pointed out that this result depends on the artificial viscosity they used, with higher temperatures reached for lower artificial viscosity values (which yield a sharper shock), and thus concluded that the gas should be heated up in reality to $`T10^5\mathrm{eV}`$. Ensman & Burrows  found in their simulations of a BSG progenitor that a collisional shock forms at $`\tau >10`$ but reaches lower temperatures, $`1`$ keV. This calculation, however, assumed thermal equilibrium between the ions and the electrons. Unfortunately, the resolution of all numerical simulations so far has not been sufficient to correctly determine the balance between collisional heating and radiative cooling on the relevant length scale of $`10^8`$ cm.

## Electro-magnetic stability and the collisionless shock.

The ion velocity distribution within the collisional shock front is highly anisotropic over a length scale $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{s,ii}`$. This anisotropy leads to the development of electro-magnetic instabilities. In order to analyze the shock front stability, we consider a plasma composed of electrons in thermal equilibrium at a temperature $`T_e`$, and protons with a bi-Maxwellian distribution having a temperature $`T_{}=m_pv_s^2`$ along one axis (representing the velocity dispersion associated with the ion streams perpendicular to the shock front), and a lower temperature in the orthogonal plane $`T_i<T_{}`$ (parallel to the shock front). Since the electrons in our case have large thermal speeds, namely $`T_e/T_{}0.1m_e/m_p`$, electrostatic instabilities such as the two-stream instability, are suppressed. We therefore focus on electro-magnetic instabilities driven by the ion anisotropy. Such instabilities are typically expected to grow at a rate of $`(v_s/c)\nu _{pi}`$, where $`\nu _{pi}`$ is the ion plasma frequency (e.g. ), with the maximum rate obtained only in the limit of infinite $`T_e`$.

Solving the dispersion relation for electro-magnetic waves in the above plasma, we find purely growing modes (i.e. modes having purely imaginary frequencies) with an electric field along the direction of the high ion temperature (i.e. perpendicular to the shock front), as long as the wave vector $`k`$ satisfies the condition $`(kc/2\pi \nu _{pi})^2<(T_{}/T_i)1`$. In the limit $`m_e/m_pT_e/T_{}m_p/m_e`$, the growth rates are

$$\nu _{EM}\frac{v_s}{c}\nu _{pi}\times \{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{min}(1,k/Y^{1/2}k_{}),\hfill & \text{for }T_{}/T_iY\text{;}\hfill \\ \left(\frac{T_{}}{T_i}1\right)k/Y^{3/2}k_{},\hfill & \text{for }T_{}/T_iY\text{,}\hfill \end{array}$$
(10)
where $`k_{}=2\pi \nu _{pi}/c`$ and $`Y=(m_pT_{}/m_eT_e)^{1/3}`$.

For large anisotropy, $`T_{}/T_iY`$, the maximal growth rate is $`(v_s/c)\nu _{pi}`$. If the anisotropy is smaller, the maximal growth rate is $`(v_s/c)\nu _{pi}/Y^{3/2}`$, which in our case yields

$$\nu _{EM}\left(0.1\frac{m_e}{m_p}\right)^{1/2}\frac{v_s}{c}\nu _{pi}3\times 10^6\rho _{10}^{1/2}v_{s,9}\mathrm{s}^1.$$
(11)
The growth rate of electro-magnetic instabilities is therefore many orders of magnitude larger than the collision rates $`\nu _{ii}`$, $`\nu _{ie}`$. Correspondingly, the characteristic length scale of the fastest growing modes, $`c\nu _{pi}^1=20\rho _{10}^{1/2}`$ cm, is many orders of magnitude smaller than the collisional shock width. Under such conditions, we expect the shock to become collisionless, i.e. to be mediated by plasma instabilities rather than by collisions. The Ohmic dissipation rate of the electro-magnetic fields, $`(m_e/m_p)(\mathrm{}/c\nu _{pi}^1)^2\nu _{ee}`$, is much lower than their growth rate for all relevant temperatures and length scales $`\mathrm{}c\nu _{pi}^1`$.

If a collisionless shock indeed forms, it would accelerate charged particles to high energies, producing a power-low distribution of particle number, $`dN/dpp^2`$ where $`p`$ is the particle momentum . The acceleration rate of either relativistic or non-relativistic protons is given by, $`\nu _{\mathrm{acc}}\nu _B(E/E_{\mathrm{th}})^1`$, where $`E`$ is the kinetic energy of the accelerated proton, $`E_{\mathrm{th}}`$ is the energy of thermal protons, and $`\nu _B`$ is the (non-relativistic) proton gyro-frequency,

$$\nu _B=\frac{1}{2\pi }\frac{eB}{m_pc}=1.5\times 10^4B_1\mathrm{s}^1,$$
(12)
where $`B_1=(B/10\mathrm{G})`$ is the magnetic field normalized to 10 G, which is the typical value inferred at the surface of RSGs . Note, however, that the electro-magnetic instabilities build-up the magnetic field. In analogy with collisionless shocks in supernova remnants , $`\gamma `$-ray bursts , or the intergalactic medium , the magnetic field may grow up to a sizeable fraction of the equipartition value, $`B_{\mathrm{e}.\mathrm{p}.}=10^{4.5}\rho _{10}^{1/2}v_{s,9}`$ G, and saturate near this value due to nonlinear effects . Thus, the acceleration rate is likely to significantly exceed the rate implied by Eq. (12). Since the acceleration rate at thermal energies, $`\nu _B`$, is much higher than the collision frequency of thermal protons, and since the collisional energy loss rate decreases as $`E^{3/2}`$ while the acceleration rate declines only as $`E^1`$, protons are expected to be accelerated to energies well above thermal.

Scattering of protons by magnetic field fluctuations is most effective if the fluctuation wavelength is comparable or larger than the proton Larmor radius. The Larmor radius of the thermal protons in an equipartition field is comparable to the wavelength $`c\nu _{pi}^1`$ over which instabilities grow fastest. As the Larmor radius of highly relativistic protons is much larger, a conservative lower limit to the maximum energy of the accelerated protons is given by

$$E_{\mathrm{max}}\frac{v_s}{c}eB\mathrm{\Delta }=18v_{s,9}B_1\tau ^{2/5}\mathrm{TeV},$$
(13)
where we have assumed that instabilities do not lead to significant amplification of the field on large scales. This is probably an underestimate of the maximum energy, as nonlinear effects are expected to amplify the field on scales $`c\nu _{pi}^1`$. If this occurs, then protons would be accelerated up to energies well in excess of $`10`$ TeV.

## Neutrinos and photons.

Protons accelerated to relativistic energy lose energy by inelastic nuclear collisions. The average number of nuclear collisions encountered by a proton is $`N_cn\sigma _0c\mathrm{\Delta }/v_s=5.2\tau /v_{s,9}`$, where $`\sigma _0=50`$ mb. Since a proton loses $`20\%`$ of its energy in each collision, the total energy lost to pion production is

$$E_\pi \xi _p\mathrm{min}(1,\tau )\frac{M}{m_p}T_i=3\xi _p\mathrm{min}(\tau ,\tau ^2)\times 10^{45}\mathrm{erg},$$
(14)
where $`\xi _p`$ is the fraction of the post-shock energy density which is converted to relativistic protons (note that for a spectrum $`dN/dpp^2`$, the energy of super-thermal particles is dominated by relativistic particles). For the strong shocks around supernova remnants, the inferred values of $`\xi _p`$ are of order unity .

Roughly a third of $`E_\pi `$ is converted to muon neutrinos, and a similar fraction to high energy photons, through pion decay. The neutrino and photon signals should be coincident and spread over a time scale of $`2R_{}/c1`$ hour. (The emission from the back side of the progenitor star is visible for TeV neutrinos but not so for $`\gamma `$-rays, and consequently the $`\gamma `$-ray flash should be shorter by about a factor of two than the neutrino pulse.) The predicted flux of $`\gamma `$-rays and muon neutrinos from a Type II supernova in our Galaxy is therefore

$$F_\gamma F_{\nu _\mu }10^4\xi _p\mathrm{min}(\tau ,\tau ^2)d_{10\mathrm{k}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}}^2\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{cm}^2,$$
(15)
where $`d_{10\mathrm{k}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}}`$ is the supernova distance in units of 10 kpc. The high density of $`10`$ eV photons from the radiative shock, will lead to a high pair-production optical depth for photons with energies $`10`$ GeV. Thus, we expect a photon spectrum $`dN_\gamma /dE_\gamma E_\gamma ^2`$ over the energy range $`100\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}E_\gamma 10\mathrm{G}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$. This signal is easily detectable with planned $`\gamma `$-ray telescopes (e.g. ).

The neutrino spectrum is expected to follow the accelerated proton spectrum, with a number per energy interval of $`dN/dEE^2`$ at relativistic proton energies. The probability that a muon neutrino will produce a high-energy muon in a terrestrial detector is  $`P_{\nu \mu }1.3\times 10^6E_{\nu ,\mathrm{TeV}}^\beta `$, with $`\beta =2`$ for $`E_{\nu ,\mathrm{TeV}}<1`$ and $`\beta =1`$ for $`E_{\nu ,\mathrm{TeV}}>1`$. Thus, the number flux $`J_\mu `$ of muon induced neutrinos can be related to the neutrino energy flux, $`F_\nu =𝑑E_\nu E_\nu (dJ_\nu /dE_\nu )`$, where $`J_\nu `$ is the neutrino number flux, through the relation

$$J_\mu =𝑑E_\nu \frac{dJ_\nu }{dE_\nu }P_{\nu \mu }\frac{1+\mathrm{ln}(E_{\nu ,\mathrm{max}}/1\mathrm{T}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V})}{\mathrm{ln}(E_{\nu ,\mathrm{max}}/1\mathrm{G}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V})}\frac{P_0}{E_0}F_\nu ,$$
(16)
where $`P_0/E_0=1.3\times 10^6\mathrm{TeV}^1`$. Using Eq. (14) we find that

$$N_\mu 0.15\frac{P_0}{E_0}\frac{E_\pi /3}{4\pi d^2}=130\xi _p\mathrm{min}(\tau ,\tau ^2)d_{10\mathrm{k}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}}^2\mathrm{km}^2$$
(17)
muons are expected to be detected for a single supernova. The factor 0.15 follows from Eq. (16) under the assumption $`E_{\nu ,\mathrm{max}}1`$ TeV. This is probably a conservative estimate, as proton energies $`E_p10`$ TeV may be achieved if the magnetic field is amplified.

## Implications.

A type II supernova in our Galaxy, which should occur once per 40 years , is expected to produce a strong neutrino signal of $`100`$ events at $`1`$ TeV spread over $`1`$ hr, in planned square-kilometer neutrino detectors (see, e.g.,  for a review). This is the strongest astrophysical signal predicted for the next generation of TeV neutrino detectors. Detection of the neutrino signal would be feasible also for optically-dark supernovae in the Galactic center or in molecular clouds, which are heavily obscured by dust. Combined analysis of the detected signal along with the thermal (10 MeV, few seconds long) neutrino burst from the cooling neutron star which should occur about 10 hours earlier ($`R_{}/v_s`$), could provide important clues about the formation process of the neutron star and the dynamics of the resulting supernova shock.

For the neutrino parameters inferred from recent atmospheric experiments , we expect flavor oscillations to produce equal fluxes of muon and tau neutrinos upon their arrival to Earth, thus allowing for a “$`\tau `$ appearance” experiment. Since the neutrino signal should coincide with the $`\gamma `$-ray signal, checking the simultaneity of photon and neutrino arrival times will allow to test for deviations from Lorentz invariance and from the weak equivalence principle. Although the neutrino and photon signals are expected to spread over $`1`$ hr, detection of a large number of neutrinos will allow to test simultaneity to an accuracy much better then 1 hr, thus providing better limits than those derived from supernova 1987A, where simultaneity was tested to an accuracy of only several hours (see  for a review).

## Acknowledgments.

We thank Z. Barkat, S. Blinnikov, A. Burrows, R. Chevalier, M. Reid and S. Saar for useful discussions. This work was supported in part by grants from the Israel-US BSF (BSF-9800343), MINERVA, NSF (AST-9900877; AST-0071019), and NASA (NAG5-7039; NAG5-7768). AL thanks the Weizmann Institute for its kind hospitality during the course of this work.


text:
# An Extremely Slow Nova?

## 1 Introduction

HD 172481 is a high galactic latitude F-type supergiant which has drawn some attention since the IRAS survey showed it to have an infrared dust excess (Odenwald 1986). Reyniers & Van Winckel (2000, henceforth RVW) have since shown that the star is a spectroscopic binary with a cool M-giant companion. Their detailed spectroscopic analysis of the F supergiant indicates a moderate metal deficiency (\[Fe/H\]=–0.55), no CNO-enhancement, a slight enhancement of s-process elements and high lithium content ($`\mathrm{log}ϵ(\mathrm{Li})=3.6`$). Essentially nothing was known about the M star prior to the present paper.

Since the IRAS measurements most authors have assumed that the F supergiant is a post-AGB star (RVW and references therein). This paper first discussed the nature of the M giant (section 3) and then, more speculatively, provides a possible explanation for the F supergiant (section 4).

## 2 Photometry

The published Stromgren and Geneva photometry (Houk & Mermilliod 1998) indicate $`V`$ between 8.9 and 9.1 while Geneva photometry from RVW shows that the visual magnitude is variable with a peak to peak amplitude of 0.22 mag. RVW show that the M star contributes about 10 percent of the flux at $`V`$ when the Mira is at maximum light (see below). The value, $`V=9.09`$ mag, given in the simbad database is used in the following analysis as representative of the mean light of the F star.

Forty-five $`JHKL`$ measurements were made between 1988 and 1999 using the MkII photometer on the 0.75-m telescope at SAAO Sutherland. These are on the SAAO system (Carter 1990) and are listed in Table 1. They are accurate to about $`\pm 0.03`$ mag at $`JHK`$ and $`\pm 0.05`$ mag at $`L`$.

## 3 Nature of the Cool Star

A Fourier analysis of the data in Table 1 reveals a clear period of 312 days and light curves folded on this period are shown in Fig. 1. The peak to peak amplitudes of the Fourier fits to these variations are: $`\mathrm{\Delta }J=0.53`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H=0.68`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }K=0.62`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }L=0.58`$ mag. These of course are lower limits to the amplitudes of the M giant as the F supergiant will contribute to the observed magnitude, particularly at the shorter wavelengths. Corrected amplitudes are discussed in section 3.1 and listed in Table 2.

These large amplitude variations clearly demonstrate that the M giant is a Mira variable and hence at the very tip of the Asymptotic Giant Branch (Feast & Whitelock 1987).

### 3.1 Infrared Colours

The reddening from HD 172481 has been estimated as $`E(BV)=0.44`$ (RVW) and 0.27 (Bersier 1996). In the following we calculate the magnitudes and colours using both of these values, generally giving the value for $`E(BV)=0.44`$ first and following it with the value associated with $`E(BV)=0.27`$, in brackets.

The first two lines of Table 2 list the magnitudes for HD 172481 at the Fourier maximum and minimum (note that, as seen in Fig. 1, the phase shifts between the $`JHKL`$ light-curves are negligible). The next three lines have been corrected assuming a reddening of $`E(BV)=0.44`$ and give, respectively, the reddened corrected magnitudes of the F2Ia star (from Johnson 1966) on the assumption that this is the only significant contributor at $`V`$, the reddening corrected mean magnitude of the Mira after the contribution from the F star has been removed, and the peak to peak amplitude of the Mira variations, also after removing the contribution of the F star. These three lines are then repeated using the alternative, $`E(BV)=0.27`$, reddening correction.

It is instructive to compare the colours deduced for this Mira with those of normal isolated Miras. Whitelock, Marang & Feast (2000, henceforth WMF) provide $`JHKL`$ observations of Miras with thin dust shells, while Whitelock et al. (1994) do the same for IRAS selected Miras with relatively thick shells. The mean colours of the Mira are listed in Table 3 together with those of a typical 312 day Mira, calculated from equations 1 to 4 of WMF.

The deduced colours are obviously somewhat uncertain, particularly at $`J`$, because of the uncertain correction for the F star. Nevertheless, they fall within the range shown by normal unreddened Miras. In particular, $`KL`$, although larger than the mean calculated from WMF equation 3, is within the range shown by normal Miras. WMF note a strong correlation between the pulsation amplitude and $`KL`$, and indeed the pulsation amplitude of this Mira is high.

This Mira is of particular interest in view of the fact that we can infer its metallicity; only a very small number of Miras, those associated with globular clusters, have reliable metallicities. RVW estimated \[Fe/H\]=–0.55 for the F supergiant which we might reasonably assume also applies to the Mira. For comparison, Table 3 gives the colours (from WMF) of the Mira V3 in NGC 5927 which has a 311 day period and \[Fe/H\]=–0.37 (Harris 1996).

### 3.2 Mass-loss Rate

As RVW discussed, HD 172481 was detected by IRAS and shows an obvious infrared excess. The colour corrected 12 $`\mu `$m mag is =1.76, so $`K[12]=4.3`$ (4.2). This is larger than values shown by any of the stars discussed by WMF, but is within the range found for IRAS Miras by Whitelock et al. (1994). This $`K[12]`$ would imply a mass-loss rate of $`\dot{M}3\times 10^6M_{}yr^1`$ (Whitelock et al. 1994 fig 21) which is high for a 312 day Mira, but higher mass-loss rates are usually associated with larger pulsation amplitudes and again we note that the pulsation amplitude of this star is high.

It would therefore seem possible that the dust shell, which is responsible for large $`K[12]`$ and presumably for the circumstellar extinction, originates entirely from the Mira. While it is not essential to assume that any of the dust is associated with the F supergiant, we cannot rule out the possibility that some of it is. Neither can we rule out the possibility of dust trapped in a circumbinary disk, as has been proposed for some other supposed post-AGB binary systems (e.g. Waters et al. 1993; Van Winckel 1999)

Note also that the IRAS colours of HD 172481 are within the range found for D-type symbiotics (Whitelock 1988), illustrating the similarity of their dust shells (see section 4).

### 3.3 Distance and Luminosity

The distance modulus of the Mira can be calculated via the period luminosity relation (Whitelock & Feast 2000):

$$M_K=3.47\mathrm{log}P+0.84,$$

to give $`(K_0M_K)=13.9`$ (13.8) or a distance of 6.0 (5.7) kpc, and a height above the galactic plane of –1.1 (–1.0) kpc.

The bolometric magnitude of the Mira can be established by fitting a blackbody to the $`JHKL`$ flux (see Robertson & Feast 1981). This gives a bolometric magnitude at mean light of 9.30 (9.09) and at maximum light of 8.72 (8.64). Or in absolute terms at mean light $`M_{bol}=4.59(4.69)`$ and $`L_M=5.3\times 10^3(5.8\times 10^3)L_{}`$.

## 4 the F supergiant

RVW established that the relative luminosities of the F supergiant and the M star are $`L_F/L_M=1.8`$, for a reddening of $`E(BV)=0.44`$ (or $`L_F/L_M=1.0`$ for $`E(BV)=0.2`$). The near-infrared measurement which they used to define the flux of the system was obtained on JD 2448850 ($`K=5.48`$ Van Winckel, private communication), i.e. at maximum light for the Mira. Thus the luminosity of the F star is $`L_F=1.6\times 10^4L_{}`$ ($`0.9\times 10^4L_{}`$).

RVW argue that the F supergiant is a post-AGB star on the basis of its high galactic latitude, large radial velocity and moderate metal deficiency. In support of this they also mention the dust, a variable H$`\alpha `$ profile and a slight overabundance of s-process elements. Our identification of the M star as a Mira variable confirms the binary as a low mass system. There is, however, an alternative to the post-AGB star scenario. The F supergiant could be a white dwarf, with hydrogen-shell burning of material accreted from the Mira wind providing a pseudo-photosphere and the observed luminosity.

Iben & Tutukov (1996) discuss the evolution of mass accreting white dwarfs in wide binaries systems, such as symbiotic stars. Of particular interest in the present context are the D-type symbiotics where a white dwarf accretes from the wind of a Mira variable in a binary system with a period in excess of about 10 years (Whitelock 1987). In certain cases the accretion rates are such that a thermonuclear runaway gives rise to a very slow nova, e.g. RR Tel and V1016 Cyg. These symbiotic stars, with their high excitation emission lines, are apparently very different from HD 172481. However, it is clear from Iben & Tutukov that relatively small differences, e.g. in the accretion rate of the white dwarf, can give rise to very different phenomena.

The luminosity derived above, $`L_F10^4L_{}`$, is that expected for a cool $`0.6M_{}`$ white dwarf in a hydrogen shell burning phase following a hydrogen shell flash (see Iben & Tutukov fig. 5).

A very rough estimate of the accretion rate of the white dwarf can be derived from Iben & Tutukov’s equation 2. If we assume the mass-loss rate from the Mira (section 3.2), a $`0.6M_{}`$ white dwarf, a total stellar mass (white dwarf plus Mira) of $`1.5M_{}`$, a wind velocity of $`20\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ and an orbital period of 10 years, the derived accretion rate onto the white dwarf is $`2\times 10^7M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$.

It is clear from fig. 7 of Iben & Tutukov that this rate would in fact result in steady hydrogen burning on the surface of the white dwarf. However, for the parameters assumed this rate should probably be regarded as an upper limit, as Iben & Tutukov’s equation 2 is based on Bondi-Hoyle accretion and other estimates lead to significantly (up to ten times) lower values (e.g. Theuns, Boffin & Jorissen 1996; Mastrodemos & Morris 1999). Furthermore, plausible changes in the period or the wind velocity could increase or decrease the rate. Nevertheless it seems likely that a white dwarf paired with this Mira would accrete mass in such a way as to either burn it steadily or in shell flashes, for a large range of stellar separations.

In discussing the nova phenomenon Iben & Tutukov point out that in wide binaries there is no reason to expect the loss of the hydrogen envelope after the explosion. So that it is possible for the newly created supergiant to last for several decades. This might explain the present condition of the F supergiant in HD 172481.

The high abundance of lithium in the supergiant spectrum (RVW) may well be key to understanding this system. Arnould & Nørgaard (1975) and Starrfield et al. (1978) predict the formation of large quantities of lithium during hydrogen-burning themonuclear runaways. However, their calculations are not obviously applicable to the situation under discussion and they also predict an overabundance of carbon and nitrogen which are not found in HD 172481 (RVW). More recently Hernanz et al. (1996) predict significant lithium production from some nova models, but these seem to underestimate the ejecta masses. Clearly more theoretical work is required in this area.

## Acknowledgments

Our thanks to Hans Van Winckel for providing a preprint of their paper and details of their unpublished infrared photometry. We are also grateful to Michael Feast for helpful discussions. This paper is based on observations made from the South African Astronomical Observatory and also made use of information from the simbad data-base. The comments and suggestions of an anonymous referee were also helpful.