text:
# Mushroom-Shaped Structures as Tracers of Buoyant Flow in the Galactic Disk

## 1 Introduction

Hi emission maps from the Canadian Galactic Plane Survey (Taylor 1999, Higgs 1999) reveal a structure resembling a mushroom, with a stem and a fragmenting cap (English et al. 2000). Assuming a distance of 3.8 kpc, the stem has a length of $`230`$ pc and the cap has a width of $`175`$ pc. The top of the cap lies $`450`$ pc below the Galactic plane. This feature covers a total velocity width of $`24`$ km s-1, with the cap redshifted from the stem by $`5`$ km s-1. English et al. (2000) estimate that the Mushroom has a kinetic energy of $`2\times 10^{50}`$ ergs and an Hi mass of at least $`1.55\times 10^5\text{ }M_{}`$. The column density contrast between the Mushroom and the ambient medium is no more than five, with the Mushroom having N$`{}_{H}{}^{}6\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2.

Mashchenko et al. (1999) and English et al. (2000) used thin-shell and two-dimensional hydrodynamical simulations to study the origin and dynamics of the Mushroom. They modelled stellar winds and supernovae (SNe) in a smooth, stratified background atmosphere, and concluded that the observational data is consistent with a single off-plane SN having a total energy of at least $`10^{51}`$ erg s-1. In their model, the hot gas produced by the single supernova remnant (SNR) expanded buoyantly into a smooth gas disk.

In this Letter, we use the global models of Avillez (2000) to show that such mushroom-shaped structures can result from the buoyant rise of bubbles out of pools of hot disk gas created from both isolated SNRs and mergers of isolated SNRs.

## 2 Supernova-Driven ISM Modelling

### 2.1 Simulations

Large-scale modelling of the interstellar gas in the disk and halo has been carried out by Avillez (2000) with a three-dimensional hydrodynamical code that uses adaptive mesh refinement (AMR). The scheme uses the piecewise parabolic method (PPM) of Collela and Woodward (1984) in combination with the AMR scheme of Berger & Colella (1989), combined with the subgridding scheme of Bell et al. (1994).

The model includes a fixed gravitational field provided by the stars in the disk, and an ideal-gas equation of state. Radiative cooling is treated assuming collisional ionization equilibrium, using a cooling function following Kahn (1976) for $`10^5<T<5\times 10^6`$ K, Dorfi (1997) for $`5\times 10^6<T<10^7`$ K, and a fit to the curves of Shapiro & Moore (1976) for the remaining temperatures. Thermal conduction is not included due to the numerical complexity and the lack of strong observational evidence for its strength in the ISM (e.g. Mac Low 1999). Its inclusion may well change our quantitative results, but we believe that our qualitative results on the behavior of hot gas in the ISM will continue to hold.

The computational domain contains a section of the Galaxy with an area of 1 kpc2 and vertical extension from -10 to 10 kpc. The innermost edge lies 8.5 kpc from the Galactic centre. The computational grid has a resolution of 10 pc, except in the layer between -250 and 250 pc, where three levels of AMR are used, yielding a finest resolution of 1.25 pc.

Type Ib, Ic, and II SNe are set up at the beginning of their Sedov phases, with radii determined by their progenitor masses, at a rate compatible with observations (Capellaro et al. 1997), normalized to the volume under study. Sixty percent of the SNe are set up within associations (Cowie et al. 1979), and the rest are set up at random sites.

### 2.2 Global Evolution of the ISM

The disk and halo gas is initially smoothly distributed in hydrostatic equilibrium with the gravitational field, with scale heights given by Dickey & Lockman (1990) and Reynolds (1987). SNe start occurring at time zero, and the system is evolved for up to 1 Gyr. After the first 200 Myr, the system reaches a statistically steady state that shows a dynamic equilibrium between upward and downward flowing gas.

Once disrupted by the SN explosions, the disk never returns to its initial state. Instead, regardless of the initial vertical distribution of the disk gas, a thin disk of cold gas forms in the Galactic plane, and, above and below, a thick inhomogeneous gas disk forms. The code does not explicitly follow ionization states, but we can trace gas with temperature $`T10^4`$ K and scale height of 180 pc, which we designate Hi, and gas with $`10^4T10^5`$ K and scale height of 1 kpc, which we designate Hii. These distributions reproduce those described in Dickey & Lockman (1990) and Reynolds (1987), respectively. The upper parts of the thick Hii disk form the disk-halo interface, where a large scale fountain is set up by hot ionized gas escaping in a turbulent convective flow.

The thick gas disk is punctured by chimneys that result from superbubbles occurring above the plane of the thin disk at $`\left|z\right|100`$ pc. As they grow, they elongate along the $`z`$-direction, owing to the local stratification of the ISM. Chimneys in the simulation typically have widths of approximately 120 pc. They inject high temperature gas directly from the Galactic disk into the halo, breaking through the warm neutral and ionized layers that compose the thick disk. This hot gas then contributes to the Galactic fountain.

## 3 Buoyant Outflow From the Galactic Plane

About forty percent of the hot gas generated in the disk does not flow through chimneys. This gas still has too much energy to be held gravitationally to the stellar disk though, so it expands buoyantly into the thick gas disk, accelerating through the cooler gas in the thin disk, with characteristic velocities of some 10 km s-1. As the hot gas rises, it entrains surrounding material to form a stem, often narrow, whose width does not depend on the scale height, as shown in Figure 1. The resulting structure resembles a mushroom composed of a cap and a stem. The cap drives the motion of the mushroom. During the first million years of evolution the mushroom consists of a rising low density cavity. The ascending gas comes from single SNRs as well as from pools of hot gas formed in the disk by isolated SNRs that merged together. On average, the hot gas produced by isolated SNe flows upward at a rate integrated over the disk of $`3\text{ }M_{}`$ per year on each side of the Galactic plane, as measured at $`z=140`$ pc (Avillez 2000).

As the mushroom comes to equilibrium with the surrounding medium and cools down, there is a reversal in the column density contrast between the mushroom and the surrounding medium, with the mushroom cap sometimes going from a negative to a positive contrast. However, the positive column density enhancement is rather modest, making it very difficult to observationally identify mushrooms.

Figures 2 and 3 show two mushrooms that developed at different points in the simulation. Both structures cooled to ambient temperatures and have column density enhancements. On average the ambient column density is $`33.2\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2, while that of the mushrooms is $`3.44\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2. The caps have the largest column density enhancement (the bluish regions inside the caps), while the stems of the two mushrooms have lower column densities lower than their caps (light bluish regions in the stems). The mushroom in Figure 2 was created by a single SN, while the larger one in Figure 3 was created by three SNe.

We can roughly measure the mass ratio $`\eta `$ of the cap to stem of a mushroom by estimating the area $`A`$ and average column density $`\overline{N}`$ of each, and taking the mass $`M=A\overline{N}`$. The mushroom shown in Figure 2 has a cap with $`A8000`$ pc2 and $`\overline{N}=3.3\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2; measuring the stem similarly yields a mass ratio $`\eta 2.4`$, and a total mass of $`3.7\times 10^4\text{ }M_{}`$. The mushroom in Figure 3 has a mass ratio of 4.4 and a total mass of $`1.5\times 10^5\text{ }M_{}`$.

The observations of English et al. (2000) show the Mushroom to have a mass of $`1.5\times 10^5\text{ }M_{}`$ and a mass ratio of three (while a classical superbubble would have a ratio of $`1/3`$). These observations are in rough agreement with the mushroom we show in Figure 3, suggesting that the Mushroom has been created by 3–4 SNRs. The greatest column density contrast between the mushrooms shown in Figures 2 and 3 and the ambient medium varies between 1.1 and 1.25, while English et al. (2000) detected a contrast of roughly two over the velocity range of the observed structure.

## 4 Discussion and Comparison with Observations

The simulations show that the disk gas is populated with strucures resembling mushrooms, resulting from hot gas buoyantly convecting through the thick gas disk. The dynamics of these structures resemble the expansion of nuclear fireballs in the Earth’s atmosphere. On the Earth, as the fireball passes through the tropopause it halts its rise and spreads because of the turnover in the temperature profile. The thick gas disk has an isothermal distribution, so there is no equivalent to the terrestrial tropopause. However, the cap still halts when it expands to buoyant equilibrium with the surrounding atmosphere at a stabilization height $`h`$.

Let us estimate this height analytically. The simulations produce a gas distribution similar to that of Dickey & Lockman (1990), but for simplicity in our analytical calculation we assume that the thick disk is isothermal with a temperature of $`T_o=10^4`$ K and constant gravitational acceleration in the $`z`$direction. Thus we approximate the thick disk with an exponential distribution given by $`\rho _o(z)=\rho _o(0)\mathrm{exp}(z/H)`$, where $`\rho _o(0)`$ is the density at the injection level and $`H=k_BT_o/mg`$ is the scale height of the medium. We choose somewhat arbitrarily a value of the gravitational acceleration inside the stellar disk $`g5\times 10^9`$ cm s-2 (Kuijken & Gilmore 1989), giving $`H75`$ pc.

The hot gas is lighter than its surroundings, so it rises, with buoyant force acting on it of $`F(z)=g[\rho _o(z)\rho _i(z)]`$, where $`\rho _o(z)`$ and $`\rho _i(z)`$ are the densities of the ambient medium and of the hot interior gas, respectively. As the hot gas rises, it maintains pressure equilibrium with the isothermal, hydrostatic surrounding gas, and continues to rise so long as a density difference is maintained.

The temperature difference between the hot gas and its surroundings is expressed in terms of the internal temperature gradient of the hot gas. Because the hot gas behaves adiabatically, its internal temperature gradient is given by

$$dT_i=\left(\frac{T_i}{z}\right)_{ad}dz,$$
(1)
with

$$\left(\frac{T_i}{z}\right)_{ad}=\left(\frac{\gamma 1}{\gamma }\right)\frac{T_i}{P_i}.$$
(2)
where $`\gamma =5/3`$ is the adiabatic parameter and $`T_i(z)`$ and $`P_i(z)`$ are the temperature and pressure of the hot gas at height $`z`$. Noting that the hot gas remains in pressure equilibrium,

$$P_i(z)=P_i(0)+P_o(0)\left(e^{z/H}1\right),$$
(3)
and integration of equation (1), with the help of equations (2) and (3), gives

$$T_i(z)=T_i(0)e^{z(\gamma 1)/(\gamma H)}.$$
(4)
Therefore, the density of the ascending hot gas is $`\rho _i(z)=\rho _i(0)\mathrm{exp}[z/(\gamma H)]`$. In these equations, $`z=0`$ refers to the injection level, rather than the plane of the galaxy.

The gas stops rising when the buoyant force vanishes, and $`\rho _o(z)=\rho _i(z)`$. This allows the determination of the stabilization point, whose location above the injection level is

$$h=5.75H\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\rho _o(0)}{\rho _i(0)}\right).$$
(5)
Taking the scale height of the isothermal, exponential atmosphere that we assumed, $`H75`$ pc, hot gas with a density of $`\rho _i(0)10^{26}`$ g cm-3 will stabilize at some 435 pc above the injection level. This is slightly above the value observed in the Mushroom and found in the simulations, most likely due to radiative cooling, as we now discuss.

The adiabatic approximation for the buoyant rise only holds if the hot gas takes longer to radiatively cool than to rise. Let us assume that hot gas has its origin in the supernova remnant that generated the Mushroom. As the remnant comes into pressure equilibrium with the surrounding medium, it contains hot gas that eventually will mix with the surrounding medium with an increase in specific energy of

$$E_o=\frac{5}{2}\frac{P_i(0)}{\rho _i(0)}(2.5\times 10^{14}\text{ erg g}\text{-1})P_{12}\rho _{26}^1,$$
(6)
where $`P_{12}=P_i(0)/(10^{12}`$ dyn cm$`{}_{}{}^{2})`$ and $`\rho _{26}=\rho _i(0)/(10^{26}`$ g cm$`{}_{}{}^{3})`$ are the pressure and density of the hot gas. The adiabatic parameter for the mixed gas is then

$$\kappa =\left(\frac{2}{5}E_o\right)^{5/3}P_i(0)^{2/3}=2.15\times 10^{31}P_{12}\rho _{26}^{5/3},$$
(7)
and the time the gas takes to cool is (Kahn 1976)

$$t_{cool}=\frac{\kappa ^{2/3}}{q}=(8.3\text{ Myr})P_{12}^{2/3}\rho _{26}^{10/9},$$
(8)
where $`q=4\times 10^{32}`$ cm6 g-1 s-4 is a constant dependent on the mean mass of atoms and ions present in the plasma. This is a time much larger than the time needed for a supernova remnant to come into pressure equilibrium with the ISM, so the hot gas must expand upwards into the thick gas disk.

The dynamical time for the hot gas to reach the stabilization point is $`t_{dyn}=(h/g)^{1/2}16.4`$ Myr for our usual parameters, roughly twice the cooling time. Thus, cooling does act during the buoyant rise of the hot gas, reducing the interior pressure and expansion during the rise, and therefore increasing the interior density and ultimately reducing the height of the stabilization point $`h`$ to that found in the simulations.

The description presented here applies to the mushroom-like structure described by English et al. (2000). We have shown that the structures found in the simulations resemble the observed structure in shape, size, vertical extension, and sign of column density enhancement.

In their numerical simulations, Mashchenko et al. (1999) and English et al. (2000) attempted to reproduce the Mushroom and the buoyant rise of the bubble that originated it. In their toy models they used artificially low density, low scale-height ($`60`$ pc) atmospheres and an initial SN remnant with a temperature of some $`10^7`$ K. The simulations described in this Letter show that such a low scale height is not a requirement, and that structures similar to the Mushroom can occur in a fully dynamical, supernova-driven disk with a turbulent density distribution on average reproducing the observed distribution found by Dickey & Lockman (1990).

The temperature of the rising gas in our model is initially only $`10^6`$ K, and decreases further as a result of its adiabatic expansion. Thus, no observable X-ray emission is expected by the time a mushroom is fully developed with a column density higher than the surrounding medium.

Two issues remain: what determines the column density contrast between the mushrooms and the surrounding medium; and how frequently does this new class of objects occur in the Galaxy? The column density contrast may result from enhanced cooling due to the compression of the mushroom cap producing higher densities in the cap. A more physical treatment of the cooling may lead to the higher observed column densities.

The number of mushrooms that form is roughly correlated with the number of isolated SNe distributed in the stellar disk Assuming that the distribution of type Ib+c and II supernovae follow the distribution of the molecular gas, their rate decreases with the galactocentric radius (Ferrière 1998), and therefore, the number of mushrooms will decrease as well at similar rate. Low density cavities with small sizes may be detectable as regions with column density deficits during the first stages of the expansion, but later these become very hard to detect because of the low column density contrast between them and the ISM. The simulations indicate that, even neglecting Type Ia SNe, at least $`40\%`$ of the hot gas in the thin disk, heated by isolated SNe, should eventually form mushrooms.

The authors acknowledge discussions with J. English, S. Basu and K. Zahnle, as well as a detailed referee’s report from J. English. This work was partially supported by an NSF CAREER fellowship to M.-M. M. L. (AST 99-85392) and by the AMNH through a Coleman Research fellowship to M. A. Initial work was supported by ESO/FCT (Portugal) through contract PESO/P/PRO/1189/97 to M. A..


format: text

text:
# References

January 2001

DIMENSIONAL REDUCTION BY A TWO-FORM
(another alternative to compactification)
P. Maraner

## Abstract

It is shown that the local coupling of a higher dimensional graviton to a closed degenerate two-form produces dimensional reduction by spontaneous breakdown of extra-dimensional translational symmetry. Four dimensional Poincaré invariance emerges as residual symmetry. As a specific example, a six dimensional geometry coupled to a closed rank 2 two-form yields the ‘ground state’

$$ds^2=\mathrm{e}^{|\xi |^2/4l^2}\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +\delta _{ij}d\xi ^id\xi ^j$$

with $`l`$ a fundamental length scale. At low energies, space-time reduces to four observable dimensions and general relativistic gravity is reproduced.

There has been recently a renewed interest in higher dimensional geometry as an intermediate step in between today’s high energies field theories and a foretold final theory. Besides the search for phenomenological implications, one of the hottest problems remains that of reproducing the effective four dimensional nature of space-time at low energies scales. To one side the traditional hypothesis of compact extra dimensions has been fully reconsidered . To the other, a remarkable alternative has been put forward by showing that dimensional reduction take place without compactification in a set-up with a 3-brane embedded in the higher dimensional space . In both approaches dimensional reduction is produced by global topological assumptions –compactness of extra-dimensions in the first case, 3-brane boundary conditions in the second one.
In this letter we explore an alternative based on the local interaction with a closed degenerate two-form. The specific model we consider is a six dimensional space-time $`(M^6,\mathrm{g}_{IJ})`$ on which a closed rank $`2`$ two-form $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}`$ is defined111Capital Latin indices run over $`I=0,1,\mathrm{},5`$. No physical hypothesis are made on the nature of $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}`$. In solving generalized Einstein’s equations it is found that translational invariance is spontaneously broken and four dimensional Poincaré invariance emerges as the residual symmetry of the geometric ‘ground state’. The corresponding metric tensor reproduces –up to the functional form of the wrap factor and two instead of one extra dimensions– the one recently investigated by L. Randall and R. Sundrum . On low energies scales space-time dynamically reduces to four effective dimensions and the ordinary general relativistic picture is recovered.

Field Equations. The reason for such a behavior grounds in the peculiar properties of the local coupling with a closed degenerate two-form. In looking for field equations we first observe that skew-symmetry and closure condition $`(d\mathrm{B})_{IJK}=0`$ make $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}`$ very similar to an ordinary electromagnetic field. In particular, it is possible to introduce a vector potential $`\mathrm{A}_I`$ which six dimensional curl equals $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}`$

$$(d\mathrm{A})_{IJ}=\mathrm{B}_{IJ}$$
(1)
As in ordinary electromagnetism $`\mathrm{A}_I`$ is determined up to the gradient of an arbitrary function only. The transformation $`\mathrm{A}_I\mathrm{A}_I+_I\chi `$ leaves $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}`$ unchanged. By this analogy, we are lead to include in the Lagrangian density of the theory a term proportional to $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}\mathrm{B}^{IJ}`$ –besides the scalar curvature $`\mathrm{R}`$ and the cosmological term. Other contributions containing $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}`$ or its covariant derivatives may be assumed higher order. At this point however, we should recall that the four dimensional electromagnetic analogy is purely formal. In a higher dimensional space-time the one-form $`\mathrm{A}_I`$ still can be coupled to geometry by giving a ‘charge’ to the graviton. By extending a well established strategy, $`\mathrm{g}_{IJ}`$ is promoted to a complex field222As for an ordinary charged scalar or fermion field, the complex nature of the metric tensor has nothing to do with its space-time transformation properties. and everywhere in field equations ordinary derivatives $`_I`$ are replaced by gauge covariant ones

$$_Iil^2\mathrm{A}_I$$
(2)
where (by choosing $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}`$ dimensionless) $`l`$ carries the dimension of a length. Clearly, by a redefinition of vector potential $`\mathrm{A}_I\mathrm{A}_I+_I\chi `$ the metric field is assumed to transform according to $`\mathrm{g}_{IJ}\mathrm{e}^{i\chi /l^2}\mathrm{g}_{IJ}`$.
In this way we come to the following generalization of Einstein’s field equations

$$\mathrm{R}/_{IJ}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{R}/\mathrm{g}_{IJ}=\Lambda \mathrm{g}_{IJ}K(\mathrm{B}_I^K\mathrm{B}_{JK}\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{B}_{KL}\mathrm{B}^{KL}\mathrm{g}_{IJ})$$
(3)
where $`\Lambda `$ and $`K`$ are constants, $`\mathrm{g}_{IJ}`$ is now a complex field and Dirac’s slash notation has been borrowed to denote quantities in which ordinary derivatives are replaced by gauge covariant ones.

Adapted Coordinates. A remarkable property of Eqns.(3) is that for no choice of $`\Lambda `$, $`K`$ and no $`\mathrm{A}_I`$ gauge, the flat space-time Minkowskian metric $`\eta _{IJ}`$ is a solution. To prove this and solve field equations it is very convenient to work in an adapted coordinates system. Given the closure condition $`(d\mathrm{B})_{IJK}=0`$, a classical theorem of Darboux ensures the possibility of globally finding coordinates in such a way that

$$B_{IJ}=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}0& 0& & & & \\ 0& 0& & & & \\ & & 0& 0& & \\ & & 0& 0& & \\ & & & & 0& 1\\ & & & & 1& 0\end{array}\right)$$

Further assuming $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}`$ non null directions to be space-like, Darboux coordinates are denoted by $`\mathrm{x}^I=(x^\mu ,\xi ^i)`$ with $`\mu =0,1,2,3`$ and $`i=4,5`$. In such coordinates frames $`\mathrm{A}_I`$ can be chosen in the form $`\mathrm{A}_I=(0,A_i)`$ with $`A_i`$ the vector potential of a two-dimensional homogeneous magnetic field –e.g. in the symmetric gauge $`A_i=(\xi ^5/2,\xi ^4/2)`$.

Four Effective Dimensions. Assuming the geometric ‘ground state’ to be compatible with four dimensional Poincaré invariance, we are lead to the following ansatz for the six dimensional line element

$$ds^2=\varphi (\xi )\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +\delta _{ij}d\xi ^id\xi ^j$$
(4)
With this choice field equations take the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l^2}}(/_4/_4+/_5/_5)\varphi \eta _{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}(2\Lambda K)\varphi \eta _{\mu \nu }`$ (5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l^2}}/_5/_5\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2l^3}}A_4/_4\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2l^3}}A_5/_5\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4l^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(/_4\varphi \right)^2}{\varphi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4l^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(/_5\varphi \right)^2}{\varphi }}={\displaystyle \frac{K}{4}}\varphi `$ (6)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l^2}}(/_4/_5+/_5/_4)\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{l^3}}A_4/_5\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{l^3}}A_5/_4\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{l^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(/_4\varphi \right)\left(/_5\varphi \right)}{\varphi }}=0`$ (7)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l^2}}/_4/_4\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2l^3}}A_4/_4\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2l^3}}A_5/_5\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4l^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(/_4\varphi \right)^2}{\varphi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4l^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(/_5\varphi \right)^2}{\varphi }}={\displaystyle \frac{K}{4}}\varphi `$ (8)
where dimensionless operators $`/_i=l_iil^1A_i`$ have been introduced. $`/_4`$ and $`/_5`$ have the form of kinematical momenta for a charged particle coupled to a homogeneous magnetic field. They close canonical commutation relations

$$[/_4,/_5]=i$$
(9)
By this analogy eq.(5) is identified with the wave equation of a scalar particle in a two dimensional homogeneous magnetic field. All solutions are easily constructed. No constant is included. By replacing them in the remaining equations we find –up to a normalization factor $`𝒩`$ and an arbitrary point $`\overline{\xi }`$ in extra directions– the only solution

$`\varphi (\xi )=𝒩\mathrm{e}^{|\xi \overline{\xi }|^2/4l^2}`$ (10)
with $`|\xi |^2=\xi _{}^{4}{}_{}{}^{2}+\xi _{}^{5}{}_{}{}^{2}`$ and corresponding to the values $`\Lambda =5/2l^2`$ and $`K=2/l^2`$. Conventionally, we set $`𝒩=1`$ and choose $`\overline{\xi }`$ as the origin of extra coordinates. In this way the line element relative to the geometric ‘ground state’ is univocally determined as

$$ds^2=\mathrm{e}^{|\xi |^2/4l^2}\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +\delta _{ij}d\xi ^id\xi ^j$$
(11)
Translational symmetry in extra directions is spontaneously broken. At energy scales small compared to the one associated to the length $`l`$, space-time is effectively squeezed on four ordinary directions while the two extra ones are made inaccessible by the Gaussian factor $`\mathrm{e}^{|\xi |^2/4l^2}`$. Up to the functional form of the wrap factor $`\varphi (\xi )`$ and two instead of one extra dimensions, the metric we find resembles the one recently studied by Randall and Sundrum. The main difference in the two approaches is that in ref. translational invariance in extra directions is broken from the very beginning by assuming the existence of the 3-brane while here it is spontaneously broken by assuming the local interaction with the closed degenerate two-form $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}`$. Apart form this, the low energy scenario associated to the metric tensor (11) shares most of the characteristics emphasized by Randall and Sundrum. We refer to their papers for a detailed discussion.

Four Dimensional Gravity. By a slight modification we can easily construct solutions corresponding to a gravitational field in the effective four dimensional space-time. In (4), we replace the flat four dimensional metric $`\eta _{\mu \nu }`$ by an arbitrary metric $`g_{\mu \nu }(x)`$

$$ds^2=\varphi (\xi )g_{\mu \nu }(x)dx^\mu dx^\nu +\delta _{ij}d\xi ^id\xi ^j$$
(12)
By replacing this new ansatz in field equations we are lead to the differential problem

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l^2}}(/_4/_4+/_5/_5)\varphi g_{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}(R_{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Rg_{\mu \nu })={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}(2\Lambda K)\varphi g_{\mu \nu }`$ (13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l^2}}/_5/_5\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2l^3}}A_4/_4\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2l^3}}A_5/_5\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4l^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(/_4\varphi \right)^2}{\varphi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4l^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(/_5\varphi \right)^2}{\varphi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}R={\displaystyle \frac{K}{4}}\varphi `$ (14)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l^2}}(/_4/_5+/_5/_4)\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{l}}A_4/_5\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{l}}A_5/_4\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{l^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(/_4\varphi \right)\left(/_5\varphi \right)}{\varphi }}=0`$ (15)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l^2}}/_4/_4\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2l^3}}A_4/_4\varphi {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2l^3}}A_5/_5\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4l^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(/_4\varphi \right)^2}{\varphi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4l^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(/_5\varphi \right)^2}{\varphi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}R={\displaystyle \frac{K}{4}}\varphi `$ (16)
where $`R_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`R`$ denote respectively Riemann tensor and scalar curvature associated to $`g_{\mu \nu }`$. The problem exactly separates in the one we just solved for the freedom $`\varphi (\xi )`$ plus a standard Einstein problem for the four dimensional metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$

$$R_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{2}Rg_{\mu \nu }=0$$
(17)
While on energy scales of order $`l^2`$ space-time is squeezed on a $`1+3`$ pseudo-Riemannian hyper-surface, the low energy –order one– dynamics of the effective four dimensional geometry is described by Einstein field equations.

Other Fields. In concluding, we remark that the coupling of $`\mathrm{B}_{IJ}`$ to other higher dimensional ‘charged’ fields –either bosonic or fermionic– also produces their squeezing on the effective four dimensional space-time by a very similar mechanism .

Acknowledgements: I wish to acknowledge useful conversations with Mario Tonin and Roberto De Pietri.


text:
# Momentum Imparted By Gravitational Waves with Spherical Wavefronts

## Abstract

A different approach has been used to evaluate the momentum imparted by the gravitational waves with spherical wavefronts. It is shown that the results obtained for momentum coincide with those already available in the literature.

PACS: 04.20.-q, 04.20.Cv, 04.30.-w

General Relativity (GR) predicts the existence of gravitational waves as solutions of Einstein’s field equations . Since these waves, by definition, have zero stress-energy tensor, a natural question arises: How can these solutions of field equations represent waves if they carry no energy? Essentially this problem arises because energy is not well defined in GR. For energy to be well defined the metric must have a time like isometry so as to allow time translational invariance. This will not generally be true. Infact, spacetimes for which it is true are static whereas gravitational wave solutions must be non-static. Thus energy is not well defined for spacetimes containing gravitational waves. The problem was resolved by Ehlers and Kundt , Pirani  and Weber and Wheeler  by considering a sphere of test particles in the path of the waves. They showed that these particles acquired a constant momentum from the waves. However, the procedure  to evaluate momentum is quite complicated. An operational procedure called the extended pseudo-Newtonian $`(e\psi N)`$ formalism  embodying the same principle has been used to express the consequences of relativity in terms of the Newtonian concept of gravitational force. We have provided a closed form expression for the momentum imparted to test particles in arbitrary spacetimes . By using this procedure for the plane and cylindrically gravitational waves , we have already obtained physically reasonable results coinciding with the earlier available results in the literature. In this paper we apply the same procedure to evaluate momentum imparted by gravitational waves with spherical wavefronts. We find that the momentum expression for such waves evaluated by this procedure coincides with that already evaluated by using M$`\ddot{o}`$ller’s prescription . We shall not discuss the $`e\psi N`$ formalism in any detail as it is available elsewhere \[6-8\] rather we shall suffice to give its essential points.

The relativistic analogue of the Newtonian gravitational force called the $`\psi N`$ gravitational force, is defined as the quantity whose directional derivative along the accelerometer, placed along the principal direction, gives the extremised tidal force and which is zero in the Minkowski space. The $`e\psi N`$ force, $`F_\mu `$, is given as

$$F_0=m[\{\mathrm{ln}(A/\sqrt{g_{00}})\}_{,0}g_{,0}^{ij}g_{ij,0}/4A],F_i=m(\mathrm{ln}\sqrt{g_{00}})_{,i},(i,j=1,2,3),$$
(1)
where $`A=(\mathrm{ln}\sqrt{g})_{_{,0}},g=det(g_{_{ij}})`$. This force formula depends on the choice of frame, which is not uniquely fixed.

The quantity whose proper time derivative is $`F_\mu `$ called the momentum four-vector for the test particle. Thus the momentum four-vector, $`p_\mu `$, is

$$p_\mu =F_\mu 𝑑t,(\mu =0,1,2,3).$$
(2)
The spatial components of this vector give the momentum imparted to test particles as defined in the preferred frame (in which $`g_{_{0i}}=0)`$.

The gravitational waves with spherical wavefronts are given by the line element of the form

$$ds^2=e^M(dt^2d\rho ^2)e^U(e^Vdz^2+e^Vd\varphi ^2),$$
(3)
where the metric functions $`U,V`$ and $`M`$ depend on the coordinates $`t`$ and $`\rho `$ only. Einstein’s vacuum field equations imply that $`e^U`$ satisfies the wave equation

$$(e^U)_{tt}(e^U)_{\rho \rho }=0,$$
(4)
and that $`V`$ satisfies the linear equation

$$V_{tt}U_tV_tV_{\rho \rho }+U_\rho V_\rho =0.$$
(5)
The remaining equations for $`M`$ are

$$U_{tt}U_{\rho \rho }=\frac{1}{2}(U_t^2+U_\rho ^2+V_t^2+V_\rho ^2)U_tM_tU_\rho M_\rho =0,$$
(6)
$$2U_{t\rho }=U_tU_\rho U_tM_\rho U_\rho M_t+V_tV_\rho .$$
(7)
It is well known that, if Eqs.(4) and (5) are satisfied, the Eqs.(6) and (7) are automatically integrable.

Using Eqs.(1) and (3), it follows that the $`e\psi N`$ force turns out to be

$$F_0=m[\dot{U}+\frac{\ddot{M}+2\ddot{U}}{\dot{M}+2\dot{U}}\frac{3\dot{U}^2+\dot{V}^2}{\dot{M}+2\dot{U}}],F_1=m\frac{M^{}}{2},F_2=0=F_3.$$
(8)
The corresponding four-vector momentum will become

$$p_0=m[U+\mathrm{ln}(\dot{M}+2\dot{U})\frac{3\dot{U}^2+\dot{V}^2}{\dot{M}+2\dot{U}}𝑑t]+f_1(\rho ),$$
(9)
$$p_1=\frac{m}{2}M^{}𝑑t+f_2(\rho ),p_2=constant=p_3.$$
(10)
where dot denotes differentiation with respect to time and prime with respect to $`\rho `$, $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ are arbitrary functions of $`\rho `$. Eqs.(9) and (10) provide the general expression of the momentum four-vector for the gravitational waves with spherical wavefronts. As we are interested in evaluating the momentum imparted by gravitational waves we need to calculate the term $`p_1`$. For this purpose, we require the value of $`M`$.

The background region ($`t<\rho `$, Minkowski) is described by the solution
$`U=\mathrm{ln}t\mathrm{ln}\rho ,V=\mathrm{ln}t\mathrm{ln}\rho `$ and $`M=0`$. Substituting these values in Eqs.(9) and (10), we have

$$p_0=m\mathrm{ln}(2/\rho )+f_1(\rho ),p_i=constant.$$
(11)
The quantity $`p_0`$ can be made zero by choosing $`f_1(\rho )=m\mathrm{ln}(2/\rho )`$ and the momentum term $`p_i`$ will be zero for a particular choice of an arbitrary constant as zero. Thus the four-vector momentum vanishes in the background region (Minkowski) as was expected.

The solution on the wavefront ($`t=\rho `$) can be written in the form
$`U=2\mathrm{ln}t,V=0,M=0`$. Using these values in Eqs.(9) and (10), it follows that

$$p_0=m\mathrm{ln}(4)+f_1(\rho ),p_i=constant.$$
(12)
We see that the momentum turns out to be constant which can be made zero if we choose constant as zero.

The solution in the wave region ($`t>\rho `$) can be found by solving Eqs.( 4) and (5) and is given in the form

$$U=\mathrm{ln}t\mathrm{ln}\rho ,V=\mathrm{ln}t\mathrm{ln}\rho +\stackrel{~}{V}(t,\rho ).$$
(13)
With this, the remaining equations for M become, for $`t>\rho `$

$`M_t+M_\rho =({\displaystyle \frac{t\rho }{t+\rho }})(\stackrel{~}{V}_t+\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho ){\displaystyle \frac{t\rho }{2(t+\rho )}}(\stackrel{~}{V}_t+\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho )^2,`$ (14)
$`M_tM_\rho =({\displaystyle \frac{t+\rho }{t\rho }})(\stackrel{~}{V}_t\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho )+{\displaystyle \frac{t\rho }{2(t\rho )}}(\stackrel{~}{V}_t\stackrel{~}{V}_\rho )^2.`$ (15)
We now make observation that the characteristic boundary condition (13) can be satisfied by the infinite set of particular solutions of self-similar type

$$\stackrel{~}{V}(t,\rho )=(t\rho )^kH_k(\frac{t^2+\rho ^2}{2t\rho }),$$
(16)
where $`k`$ is an arbitrary real or complex number, and the functions $`H_k(\frac{t^2+\rho ^2}{2t\rho })`$ satisfy some ordinary linear equation which can be reduced to a hypergeometric equation and the condition $`H_k(1)=0`$. This form of solution has been used in  in a different context. As an explicit example we may consider the case of a single component

$$\stackrel{~}{V}(t,\rho )=a_k(t\rho )^kH_k(\frac{t^2+\rho ^2}{2t\rho })$$
(17)
for some $`k\frac{1}{2}`$ and constant $`a_k`$. In this case, $`M`$ is given by

$$M=\frac{1}{2k}a_k(t^2\rho ^2)(t\rho )^{k1}H_{k1}\frac{1}{2k}(t\rho )^{2k}a_k^2[k^2H_k^2\frac{(t^2\rho ^2)^2}{4t^2\rho ^2}H_{k1}^2].$$
(18)
Notice that the dimension of $`a_k`$ is $`L^{2k}`$. If we use this value of $`M`$ after taking its derivative in Eq.(10), it may not be possible to perform its integration. For the purpose of simplicity, we take a special case when $`k=1`$ for which $`M`$ takes the form

$$M=\frac{1}{2}a_1(t^2\rho ^2)H_0\frac{1}{2}(t\rho )^2a_1^2[H_1^2\frac{(t^2\rho ^2)^2}{4t^2\rho ^2}H_0^2],$$
(19)
where $`H_0=\mathrm{ln}(t/\rho ),H_1=\frac{1}{2}[(t/\rho +\rho /t)\mathrm{ln}(t/\rho )(t/\rho \rho /t)]`$. After taking derivative of $`M`$ with respect to $`\rho `$, we substitute it in Eq.(10) and after a tedious integration, we obtain

$`p_1=m{\displaystyle \frac{a_1}{4}}[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}(t^3/\rho )6t\rho +4t\rho \mathrm{ln}(t/\rho )+a_1\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{5}}(t^5/\rho )+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{27}}t^3\rho +5t\rho ^3`$ (20)
$`4({\displaystyle \frac{5}{9}}t^3\rho +t\rho ^3)\mathrm{ln}(t/\rho )+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}t^3\rho (\mathrm{ln}(t/\rho ))^2\}]+f_2(\rho ).`$ (21)
This gives the momentum imparted to test particles by gravitational waves with spherical wavefronts. The quantity $`p_1`$ can be made zero for the $`t0`$ limit by choosing $`f_2=0`$. However, it immediately indicates the presence of singularity when $`\rho =0`$ and this singularity at $`\rho =0`$ acts as a source of the gravitational waves inside the wave region. This coincides with the result evaluated by using M$`\ddot{o}`$ller’s prescription . This is a physically reasonable expression for the momentum imparted by gravitational waves. The interpretation of $`p_0`$ in the $`e\psi N`$ formalism is given elsewhere . It can also be shown that, near the wavefront as $`t\rho `$

$$\stackrel{~}{V}a_k(t+\rho )^1(t\rho )^{1+2k},M(\frac{1+2k}{2k})a_k(t\rho )^{2k}.$$
(22)
Using Eqs.(10) and (20), it follows that

$$p_1=\frac{1}{4k}m(1+2k)a_k(t\rho )^{2k}+f_2(\rho ).$$
(23)
This gives the momentum near the spherical wavefront. We see that for a particular choice of $`f_2`$, it reduces to the momentum expression given by Eq.(12) on the wavefront. We remark that our results exactly coincide with those evaluated by using M$`\ddot{o}`$ller’s prescription for the background region and on the wavefront. For the wave region, these two can be equated for a particular choice of an arbitrary function $`f_2`$. We have seen that in all the three cases we obtain a physically reasonable expression for the momentum.

Acknowledgment

The author would like to thank Prof. Chul H. Lee for his hospitality at the Department of Physics and Korea Scientific and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF) for postdoc fellowship at Hanyang University Seoul, KOREA.

References

 Misner, C.W., Thorne, K.S. and Wheeler, J.A.: Gravitation (W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1973).

 Ehlers, J. and Kundt, W.: Gravitation: An Introduction to Current Research, ed. L. Witten (Wiley, New York, 1962)49.

 Pirani, F.A.E.: Gravitation: An Introduction to Current Research, ed. L. Witten (Wiley, New York, 1962)199.

 Weber, J. and Wheeler, J.A.: Rev. Mod. Phy. 29(1957)509.

 Weber, J.: General Relativity and Gravitational Waves, (Interscience, New York, 1961).

 Qadir, A. and Sharif, M.: Nuovo Cimento 107B(1992)1071;
Sharif, M.: Ph.D. Thesis, Quaid-i-Azam University (1991).

 Qadir, A. and Sharif, M.: Physics Letters A 167(1992)331.

 Sharif, M.: Astrophys. Space Sci. 253(1997)195; 262(1999)297.

 M$`\ddot{o}`$ller, C.: Ann. Phys. (NY) 4(1958)347; 12(1961)118.

 Alekseev, G.A. and Griffths, J.B.: Class. Quantum Grav. 12(1995)L13.

 Alekseev, G.A. and Griffths, J.B.: Class. Quantum Grav. 13(1996)2191.

 Griffths, J.B.: Class. Quantum Grav. 10(1993)975.

 Alekseev, G.A. and Griffths, J.B.: Phys. Rev. D 52(1995)4497.

 Qadir, Asghar, Sharif, M. and Shoaib, M.: Nuovo Cimento 115B(2000)419.


text:
# References

UCRHEP-T300

March 2001

Making Neutrinos Massive with
an Axion in Supersymmetry
Ernest Ma
Physics Department, University of California, Riverside, California 92521

## Abstract

The minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM) of particle interactions is extended to include three singlet (right-handed) neutrino superfields together with three other singlet superfields. The resulting theory is assumed to be invariant under an anomalous global U(1) (Peccei-Quinn) symmetry with one fundamental mass $`m_2`$. The soft breaking of supersymmetry at the TeV scale is shown to generate an axion scale $`f_a`$ of order $`m_2`$. Neutrino masses are generated by $`f_a`$ according to the usual seesaw mechanism.

The minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM) is a well-motivated extension of the standard model (SM) of particle interactions. Nevertheless, it is missing at least two important ingredients. There is no neutrino mass and the strong CP problem  is unresolved. Whereas separate remedies exist for both shortcomings, they are in general unrelated . In the following, I start with a supersymmetric theory of just one large fundamental mass $`(m_2)`$. I assume it to be invariant under an anomalous global U(1) symmetry which is an extension of the well-known Peccei-Quinn symmetry  to include three singlet (right-handed) neutrino superfields $`(\widehat{N}^c)`$ and three other singlet superfields $`(\widehat{S})`$. The supersymmetry is then softly broken at $`M_{SUSY}`$ of order 1 TeV. As a result of the assumed particle content of the theory, an axion scale $`f_a`$ of order $`m_2`$ is generated, from which neutrinos obtain masses via the usual seesaw mechanism with $`m_Nf_a`$.

Consider first the MSSM superpotential:

$$\widehat{W}=\mu \widehat{H}_u\widehat{H}_d+h_u\widehat{H}_u\widehat{Q}\widehat{u}^c+h_d\widehat{H}_d\widehat{Q}\widehat{d}^c+h_e\widehat{H}_d\widehat{L}\widehat{e}^c.$$
(1)
Under $`U(1)_{PQ}`$, the quark $`(\widehat{Q},\widehat{u}^c,\widehat{d}^c)`$ and lepton $`(\widehat{L},\widehat{e}^c)`$ superfields have charges $`+1/2`$, whereas the Higgs $`(\widehat{H}_u,\widehat{H}_d)`$ superfields have charges $`1`$. Hence the $`\mu `$ term is forbidden. It is replaced here by $`h_2\widehat{S}_2\widehat{H}_u\widehat{H}_d`$, where $`\widehat{S}_2`$ is a singlet superfield with PQ charge $`+2`$.

Add three singlet superfields $`\widehat{N}^c`$ with PQ charges $`+1/2`$. The term $`h_N\widehat{H}_u\widehat{L}\widehat{N}^c`$ is then allowed, but the usual Majorana mass term $`m_N\widehat{N}^c\widehat{N}^c`$ is forbidden. Instead, it is replaced by $`h_1\widehat{S}_1\widehat{N}^c\widehat{N}^c`$, where $`\widehat{S}_1`$ has PQ charge $`1`$.

So far there is no mass scale in the superpotential of this theory. It is thus natural to introduce a third singlet superfield $`\widehat{S}_0`$ with PQ charge $`2`$ so that the complete superpotential of this theory is given by

$`\widehat{W}`$ $`=`$ $`m_2\widehat{S}_2\widehat{S}_0+f\widehat{S}_1\widehat{S}_1\widehat{S}_2+h_1\widehat{S}_1\widehat{N}^c\widehat{N}^c+h_2\widehat{S}_2\widehat{H}_u\widehat{H}_d`$ (2)
$`+`$ $`h_N\widehat{H}_u\widehat{L}\widehat{N}^c+h_u\widehat{H}_u\widehat{Q}\widehat{u}^c+h_d\widehat{H}_d\widehat{Q}\widehat{d}^c+h_e\widehat{H}_d\widehat{L}\widehat{e}^c.`$
The mass $`m_2`$ is a large fundamental scale which will be shown to coincide with the axion scale, even though supersymmetry is only broken at the TeV scale. The term $`\widehat{S}_1\widehat{S}_1\widehat{S}_2`$ is automatically present and will be the key to understanding how $`f_a`$ is generated from $`M_{SUSY}`$. Consider next the spontaneous breaking of $`U(1)_{PQ}`$ by the vacuum expectation values $`v_{2,1,0}`$ of $`S_{2,1,0}`$ respectively. The $`\mu `$ term of the MSSM is then given by $`h_2v_2`$ and the Majorana mass of the neutrino singlet is $`2h_1v_1`$. Hence $`v_1`$ should be many orders of magnitude greater than $`v_2`$. With $`m_N=2h_1v_1`$, the usual seesaw relationship

$$m_\nu =\frac{h_N^2v_u^2}{m_N}$$
(3)
is also obtained. Now the axion scale $`f_a`$ is of order $`v_1`$ as well, thus $`m_Nf_a`$. Whereas this relationship was also proposed previously , the hierarchy problem of $`v_2<<v_1`$ was not addressed. If a sterile neutrino superfield $`\widehat{\nu }_s`$ is desirable, it may be assigned PQ charge $`5/2`$. The term $`h_s\widehat{S}_2\widehat{\nu }_s\widehat{N}^c`$ is then allowed in Eq. (2), resulting in a seesaw mass for $`\nu _s`$ given by $`h_s^2v_2^2/m_N`$.

The strong CP problem is the problem of having the instanton-induced term

$$_\theta =\theta _{QCD}\frac{g_s^2}{64\pi ^2}ϵ_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }G_a^{\mu \nu }G_a^{\alpha \beta }$$
(4)
in the effective Lagrangian of quantum chromodynamics (QCD), where $`g_s`$ is the strong coupling constant, and

$$G_a^{\mu \nu }=^\mu G_a^\nu ^\nu G_a^\mu +g_sf_{abc}G_b^\mu G_c^\nu $$
(5)
is the gluonic field strength. If $`\theta _{QCD}`$ is of order unity, the neutron electric dipole moment is expected  to be $`10^{10}`$ times its present experimental upper limit ($`0.63\times 10^{25}e`$ cm) . This conundrum is most elegantly resolved by invoking a dynamical mechanism  to relax the above $`\theta _{QCD}`$ parameter (including all contributions from colored fermions) to zero. However, this necessarily results  in a very light pseudoscalar particle called the axion, which has not yet been observed .

To reconcile the nonobservation of an axion in present experiments and the constraint $`10^9\mathrm{GeV}<f_a<10^{12}`$ GeV from astrophysics and cosmology , three types of “invisible” axions have been discussed. The DFSZ solution  introduces a heavy singlet scalar field as the source of the axion but its mixing with the doublet scalar fields (which couple to the usual quarks) is very much suppressed. The KSVZ solution  also has a heavy singlet scalar field but it couples only to new heavy colored fermions. The gluino solution  identifies the $`U(1)_R`$ of superfield transformations with $`U(1)_{PQ}`$ and thus the axion is a dynamical phase attached to the gluino as well as all other superparticles. The present model is of the DFSZ type, but the use of 3 fundamental superfields is motivated by Refs..

Before discussing the spontaneous breaking of $`U(1)_{PQ}`$ in the context of soft supersymmetry breaking, consider $`\widehat{W}`$ of Eq. (2) in terms of baryon number and lepton number. It is clear that the former is conserved as a global symmetry ($`\widehat{Q}`$ has $`B=1/3`$, $`\widehat{u}^c`$ and $`\widehat{d}^c`$ have $`B=1/3`$, all others have $`B=0`$), whereas the latter is conserved only as a discrete symmetry ($`\widehat{L}`$, $`\widehat{e}^c`$, and $`\widehat{N}^c`$ are odd, all others are even). Thus the usual $`R`$ parity of the MSSM is also conserved. The three $`\widehat{N}^c`$ superfields are well-motivated because they allow small seesaw neutrino masses for neutrino oscillations . The Peccei-Quinn symmetry is well-motivated as the most attractive solution of the strong CP problem. Hence $`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$ are both well-motivated. Finally, $`S_0`$ is well-motivated because $`\widehat{W}`$ should have a large fundamental mass scale. Given all these well-motivated inputs, Eq. (2) is uniquely determined and the two crucial extra terms $`m_2\widehat{S}_2\widehat{S}_0`$ and $`f\widehat{S}_1\widehat{S}_1\widehat{S}_2`$ are automatically present .

Consider the scalar potential of $`S_{2,1,0}`$, i.e.

$$V=|m_2S_0+fS_1^2|^2+m_2^2|S_2|^2+4f^2|S_1|^2|S_2|^2.$$
(6)
There are two supersymmetric minima: the trivial one with $`v_0=v_1=v_2=0`$, and the much more interesting one with

$$v_2=0,m_2v_0+fv_1^2=0,$$
(7)
where $`v_{2,1,0}=S_{2,1,0}`$. The latter breaks $`U(1)_{PQ}`$ spontaneously and the superpotential of $`\widehat{S}_{2,1,0}`$ becomes

$`\widehat{W}^{}={\displaystyle \frac{m_2}{v_1}}(v_1\widehat{S}_02v_0\widehat{S}_1)\widehat{S}_2+f\widehat{S}_1\widehat{S}_1\widehat{S}_2,`$ (8)
after shifting by $`v_{2,1,0}`$. This shows clearly that the linear combination

$$\frac{v_1\widehat{S}_1+2v_0\widehat{S}_0}{\sqrt{|v_1|^2+4|v_0|^2}}$$
(9)
is a massless superfield. Hence the axion is not even contained in $`\widehat{S}_2`$, and its effective coupling through $`\widehat{S}_2`$ will be suppressed by $`M_{SUSY}/v_{1,0}`$ as desired.

At this point, the individual values of $`v_1`$ and $`v_0`$ are not determined. This is because the vacuum is invaraint not only under a phase rotation but also under a scale transformation as a result of the unbroken supersymmetry . As such, it is unstable and the soft breaking of supersymmetry at the TeV scale will determine $`v_1`$ and $`v_0`$, and $`v_2`$ will become nonzero. Specifically, the supersymmetry of this theory is assumed broken by all possible holomorphic soft terms which are invariant under $`U(1)_{PQ}`$. In particular, all the usual MSSM soft terms are present except for the $`\mu BH_uH_d`$ term. However, there is the $`h_2A_2S_2H_uH_d`$ term as well as the $`|m_2S_0+fS_1S_1+h_2H_uH_d|^2`$ term, hence “$`\mu B`$” = $`h_2[A_2v_2+(m_2v_0+fv_1^2)]`$. Recall that the $`\mu `$ parameter of the MSSM is replaced here by $`h_2v_2`$. Hence $`v_2`$ should be of order $`M_{SUSY}`$ and $`m_2v_0+fv_1^2`$ of order $`M_{SUSY}^2`$, and that is exactly what will be shown in the following.

Add now the other holomorphic soft terms of the scalar potential:

$`V_{soft}`$ $`=`$ $`\mu _0^2|S_0|^2+\mu _1^2|S_1|^2+\mu _2^2|S_2|^2`$ (10)
$`+`$ $`[\mu _{20}m_2S_2S_0+\mu _{12}S_1^2S_2+h.c.],`$
where all new parameters are assumed of order $`M_{SUSY}1`$ TeV. Consider the minimum of the scalar potential of $`S_{2,1,0}`$ with the addition of $`V_{soft}`$, i.e.

$`V_{min}`$ $`=`$ $`(m_2^2+\mu _0^2)v_0^2+\mu _1^2v_1^2+(m_2^2+\mu _2^2)v_2^2+2\mu _{20}m_2v_2v_0`$ (11)
$`+`$ $`2m_2fv_1^2v_0+2\mu _{12}v_1^2v_2+4f^2v_2^2v_1^2+f^2v_1^4,`$
where every quantity has been assumed real for simplicity. The conditions on $`v_{2,1,0}`$ are

$`(m_2^2+\mu _2^2+4f^2v_1^2)v_2+\mu _{20}m_2v_0+\mu _{12}v_1^2=0,`$ (12)
$`f(m_2v_0+fv_1^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mu _1^2+\mu _{12}v_2+2f^2v_2^2=0,`$ (13)
$`m_2(m_2v_0+fv_1^2)+\mu _0^2v_0+\mu _{20}m_2v_2=0.`$ (14)
Together they show that Eq. (7) is modified to read

$$v_2M_{SUSY},m_2v_0+fv_1^2M_{SUSY}^2.$$
(15)
However, $`v_0`$ and $`v_1`$ are individually of order $`m_2`$. This can be shown by integrating out the heavy fields $`S_{2,0}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{2,0}`$ in the limit where $`S_1`$ is massless. The effective scalar potential for $`S_1`$ is necessarily of the form

$$V_{eff}=a|S_1|^2+b|S_1|^4.$$
(16)
At tree level, $`a=\mu _1^2`$, and

$$b=f^2\frac{(m_2f)^2}{m_2^2+\mu _0^2}\frac{\mu _{12}^2}{m_2^2+\mu _2^2}\frac{f^2\mu _0^2\mu _{12}^2}{m_2^2},$$
(17)
where the mixing parameter $`\mu _{20}`$ has been neglected. Hence

$$v_1^2=\frac{a}{2b}\frac{\mu _1^2m_2^2}{2(f^2\mu _0^2\mu _{12}^2)}.$$
(18)
Since all soft supersymmetry breaking parameters are of order $`M_{SUSY}`$, this shows that $`v_1`$ is of order $`m_2`$ and so is $`v_0`$. The parameters $`a`$ and $`b`$ have logarithmically divergent corrections in one loop, but they are proportional to $`M_{SUSY}^2`$ and $`M_{SUSY}^2/m_2^2`$ respectively, hence they do not spoil the tree-level result of Eq. (18). \[This would not be the case if the nonholomorphic soft term $`S_1^2S_0^{}`$ were added.\]

To understand why $`v_1>>M_{SUSY}`$ is possible, consider the superfield of Eq. (9). The phase of the corresponding scalar field is the axion, but the magnitude is a physical scalar particle of mass $`M_{SUSY}`$, and the associated Majorana fermion (axino) also has a mass $`M_{SUSY}`$. Hence $`v_10`$ does not necessarily imply that supersymmetry is broken at that scale. For example, the superfield $`N^c`$ has the large mass $`2h_1v_1`$, and $`M_{SUSY}`$ accounts only for the relative small splitting between its scalar and fermion components.

As the electroweak $`SU(2)_L\times U(1)_Y`$ gauge symmetry is broken by the vacuum expectation values $`v_{u,d}`$ of $`H_{u,d}`$, the observed doublet neutrinos acquire naturally small Majorana masses given by $`m_\nu =h_N^2v_u^2/(2fv_1)`$ via the usual seesaw mechanism. Since $`H_{u,d}`$ have PQ charges as well, the axion field is now given by

$$a=\frac{v_1\theta _1+2v_0\theta _02v_2\theta _2+v_u\theta _u+v_d\theta _d}{V}$$
(19)
where $`V=\sqrt{v_1^2+4v_0^2+4v_2^2+v_u^2+v_d^2}`$, and $`\theta _i`$ are the various properly normalized angular fields, from the decomposition of a complex scalar field $`\varphi =(1/\sqrt{2})(v+\rho )\mathrm{exp}(i\theta /v)`$ with the kinetic energy term

$$_\mu \varphi ^{}^\mu \varphi =\frac{1}{2}(_\mu \rho )^2+\frac{1}{2}(_\mu \theta )^2\left(1+\frac{\rho }{v}\right)^2.$$
(20)
The axionic coupling to quarks is thus

$$(_\mu a)\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{v_u}{V}\right)\frac{1}{v_u}\overline{u}\gamma ^\mu \gamma _5u+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{v_d}{V}\right)\frac{1}{v_d}\overline{d}\gamma ^\mu \gamma _5d\right]=\frac{1}{2V}(_\mu a)\underset{q=u,d}{}\overline{q}\gamma ^\mu \gamma _5q,$$
(21)
as in the DFSZ model.

Consider now all the physical particles of this theory. (1) There is a heavy Dirac fermion of mass $`m_2\sqrt{1+4v_0^2/v_1^2}`$, formed out of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_2`$ and a linear combination of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{S}_1`$. The two associated scalars also have the same mass but with vacuum expectation values of order $`M_{SUSY}`$. (2) There are three heavy $`N^c`$ superfields with mass of order $`S_1=v_1m_2`$. They provide seesaw masses for the neutrinos and generate a primordial lepton asymmetry through their decays . This gets converted into the present observed baryon asymmetry of the Universe through the $`B+L`$ violating electroweak sphalerons . (3) The particles of the MSSM and their interactions are all present, but with the $`\mu `$ parameter given by $`h_2v_2M_{SUSY}`$ and the $`\mu B`$ parameter by $`h_2[A_2v_2+(m_2v_0+fv_1^2)]M_{SUSY}^2`$, thus solving the $`\mu `$ problem (i.e. why $`\mu M_{SUSY}`$ and not $`m_2`$) without causing a $`\mu B`$ problem. (4) Whereas the spontaneous breaking of $`U(1)_{PQ}`$ generates an axion at the scale $`Vm_2`$, thus solving the strong CP problem, the physical scalar field (saxion) with this dynamical phase has a mass $`M_{SUSY}`$. It is effectively unobservable  because its couplings to all MSSM particles are suppressed by at least $`v_{2,u,d}/V`$. (5) An axino of mass $`M_{SUSY}`$ also exists. Since $`R`$ parity is conserved and the axino has $`R=1`$, it may be the stable LSP (lightest supersymmetric particle) of this theory and be experimentally observed.

The $`7\times 7`$ mass matrix spanning the $`R=1`$ neutral fermions of this theory in the basis $`(\stackrel{~}{B},\stackrel{~}{W}_3,\stackrel{~}{H}_u^0,\stackrel{~}{H}_d^0,\stackrel{~}{S}_2,\stackrel{~}{S}_0,\stackrel{~}{S}_1)`$ is given by

$$=\left[\begin{array}{ccccccc}\stackrel{~}{m}_1& 0& sm_3& sm_4& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& \stackrel{~}{m}_2& cm_3& cm_4& 0& 0& 0\\ sm_3& cm_3& 0& h_2v_2& h_2v_d& 0& 0\\ sm_4& cm_4& h_2v_2& 0& h_2v_u& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& h_2v_d& h_2v_u& 0& m_2& 2fv_1\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& m_2& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 2fv_1& 0& 2fv_2\end{array}\right],$$
(22)
where $`s=\mathrm{sin}\theta _W`$, $`c=\mathrm{cos}\theta _W`$, $`m_3=M_Z\mathrm{cos}\beta `$, $`m_4=M_Z\mathrm{sin}\beta `$, with $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =v_u/v_d`$. Without $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{2,1,0}`$, the above is just the neutralino mass matrix of the MSSM and the LSP is a linear combination of the two gauginos and the two Higgsinos. In this theory, that combination has a small overlap with the axino of order $`v_{u,d}/V`$. If kinematically allowed, it will decay into the axino and the $`Z`$ boson or a neutral Higgs boson.

In conclusion, a desirable extension of the MSSM has been presented which has only two input scales, i.e. the large fundamental scale $`m_2`$ and the soft supersymmetry breaking scale $`M_{SUSY}`$. Assuming the validity of $`U(1)_{PQ}`$ and its implementation in terms of Eqs. (2) and (10), an axion scale $`m_2`$ is generated, which solves the strong CP problem and makes neutrinos massive via the usual seesaw mechanism, without breaking the supersymmetry at $`m_2`$. The baryon asymmetry of the Universe is accommodated as well as the existence of dark matter. The $`\mu `$ problem of the MSSM is solved without causing a $`\mu B`$ problem. The other particles associated with the axion (saxion and axino) have masses of order $`M_{SUSY}`$, with the axino as a candidate for the true lightest supersymmetric particle.

I thank G. Senjanovic and F. Zwirner for very helpful discussions. This work was supported in part by the U. S. Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG03-94ER40837.