text:
# References

## Abstract

We construct new axially symmetric solutions of SU(2) Yang-Mills theory in a four dimensional anti-de Sitter spacetime. Possessing nonvanishing nonabelian charges, these regular configurations have also a nonzero angular momentum. Numerical arguments are also presented for the existence of rotating solutions of Einstein-Yang-Mills equations in an asymptotically anti-de Sitter spacetime.

Rotating Yang-Mills dyons in anti-de Sitter spacetime

Eugen Radu

Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Fakultät für Physik, Hermann-Herder-Straße 3
Freiburg D-79104, Germany

Introduction.–  Given its important role in string theory, anti-de Sitter (AdS) spacetime has recently attracted huge interest. As proven by some authors , even the simple spherically symmetric $`SU(2)`$ Einstein-Yang-Mills (EYM) system with a negative cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ presents some surprising results. A variety of well known features of asymptotically flat self-gravitating nonabelian solutions are not shared by their AdS counterparts. First, there is a continuum of regular and black hole solutions in terms of the adjustable shooting parameters that specifies the initial conditions at the origin or at the event horizon, rather then discrete points. The spectrum has a finite number of continuous branches. Secondly, there are nontrivial solutions stable against spherically symmetric linear perturbations, corresponding to stable monopole and dyon configurations. The solutions are classified by non-Abelian electric and magnetic charges and the ADM mass. When the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ approaches zero, an already-existing branch of monopoles and dyon solutions collapses to a single point in the moduli space . At the same time new branches of solutions emerge.

An interesting physical question is whether the known static nonabelian solutions can be generalized to include an angular momentum. In a EYM theory without a cosmological constant, slowly rotating charged solutions are known to exist . For regular configurations, the angular momentum and the electric charge are related. The existence of these perturbative rotating solutions came as a surprise, given the experience with other solitonic solutions . However, it is not clear whether they can be extended to exact solutions . Thus it may be important to consider other types of asymptotics for a better understanding of this question.

Here we consider this problem in a AdS geometry for a $`SU(2)`$ field. Although an analytic or approximate solution still appears to be intractable, we present numerical arguments that a negative cosmological constant could support finite energy nonabelian configurations with a nonvanishing angular momentum. These regular solutions are, in nature, nontopological solitons and carry both angular momentum and electric charge. Moreover, they are found to survive in the presence of gravity.

Axially symmetric ansatz and general relations.–  We consider the Yang-Mills (YM) equations

$$_\mu F^{\mu \nu }+ie[A_\mu ,F^{\mu \nu }]=0,$$
(1)
in a fixed AdS background

$`ds^2={\displaystyle \frac{dr^2}{1\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}r^2}}+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi )^2(1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}r^2)dt^2,`$ (2)
where $`e`$ is the gauge coupling constant, $`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu +ie[A_\mu ,A_\nu ]`$ and $`A_\mu =\frac{1}{2}\tau ^aA_\mu ^a`$. We are interested in stationary, axially symmetric solutions of the $`SU(2)`$ YM configurations with a nonvanishing total angular momentum.

For the time translation symmetry, we choose a natural gauge such that $`A/t`$=0. However, a rotation around the $`z`$axis can be compensated by a gauge rotation $`_\phi A=D\mathrm{\Psi }`$ , with $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ being a Lie-algebra valued gauge function. Therefore we find $`F_{\mu \phi }=D_\mu W,`$ where $`W=A_\phi \mathrm{\Psi }`$.

The energy density of the solutions is given by the $`tt`$-component of the energy momentum tensor $`T_\mu ^\nu `$; integration over all space yields their energy

$`E={\displaystyle 2Tr\{F_{\mu t}F^{\mu t}+\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }\}\sqrt{g}d^3x}.`$ (3)
The electric part in the above relation can be expressed as a surface integral at infinity

$`E_e={\displaystyle Tr\{F_{\mu t}F^{\mu t}\}\sqrt{g}d^3x}={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}}Tr\{A_tF^{\mu t}\}𝑑S_\mu .`$ (4)
Thus, similar to the asymptotically flat case , a vanishing magnitude of the electric potentials at infinity $`|A_t|`$ implies a purely magnetic solution. For the gauge invariant nonabelian charges we use the expressions

$`Q_e={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}}|^{}F|,Q_M={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}}|F|,`$ (5)
where the vertical bars denote the Lie-algebra norm. The total angular momentum of a solution is given by

$`J`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle T_\phi ^t\sqrt{g}d^3x}={\displaystyle 2Tr\{F_{r\phi }F^{rt}+F_{\theta \phi }F^{\theta t}\}\sqrt{g}d^3x},`$ (6)
and can be expressed as a surface integral at infinity

$`J`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}}2Tr\{WF^{\mu t}\}𝑑S_\mu .`$ (7)
The usual ansatz used when discussing axially symmetric YM configurations in spherical coordinates is

$$A_\mu dx^\mu =\frac{1}{2e}\left[\tau _\varphi ^n\left(\frac{H_1}{r}dr+\left(1H_2\right)d\theta \right)n\left(\tau _r^nH_3+\tau _\theta ^n\left(1H_4\right)\right)\mathrm{sin}\theta d\varphi +\left(\tau _r^nH_5+\tau _\theta ^nH_6\right)dt\right],$$
(8)
with the Pauli matrices $`\stackrel{}{\tau }=(\tau _x,\tau _y,\tau _z)`$ and $`\tau _r^n=\stackrel{}{\tau }(\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}n\varphi ,\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}n\varphi ,\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$, $`\tau _\theta ^n=\stackrel{}{\tau }(\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{cos}n\varphi ,\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}n\varphi ,\mathrm{sin}\theta )`$, $`\tau _\varphi ^n=\stackrel{}{\tau }(\mathrm{sin}n\varphi ,\mathrm{cos}n\varphi ,0)`$ . The six gauge field functions $`H_i`$ depend only on $`r`$ and $`\theta `$. To fix the residual abelian gauge invariance we choose the gauge condition $`r_rH_1_\theta H_2=0`$ . The integer $`n`$ represents the winding number of the solutions. For $`n=1`$ and $`H_1=H_3=H_5=H_6=0`$, $`H_2=H_4=w(r)`$ the spherically symmetric magnetic ansatz of ref.  is recovered.

For the magnetic potentials we impose the familiar boundary conditions $`H_2=H_4=1,H_1=H_3=0`$ at the origin and $`H_2=H_4=w_0,H_1=H_3=0`$ at infinity, where $`w_0`$ has an arbitrary value. Given the parity reflection symmetry, we need to consider solutions only in the region $`0\theta \pi /2`$. The boundary conditions satisfied by the magnetic potentials along the axes ($`\theta =0,\pi /2`$) are $`H_1=H_3=0,_\theta H_2=_\theta H_4=0.`$

For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$, there are no boundary conditions to exclude a nonabelian solution with nonzero electric potential. In  numerical arguments have been presented for the existence of axially symmetric YM solutions with nonvanishing magnetic and electric charges and winding number $`n>1`$. These solutions generalize the $`n=1`$ spherically symmetric dyons discussed in . For that type of configurations, the electric potentials $`H_5,H_6`$ satisfy a set of boundary conditions inspired by the flat-space Yang-Mills-Higgs (YMH) dyons . For example, we imposed at infinity $`H_5=V,H_6=0`$, while at the origin $`H_5=H_6=0`$. Nevertheless, we find that these dyon configurations posses a vanishing total angular momentum $`J`$ .

However, already for a vanishing cosmological constant, the above boundary conditions does not exhaust all possibilities even for $`n=1`$. The monopole-antimonopole solutions (MAP) in a YMH theory  or the asymptotically flat rotating EYM black holes discussed in  are examples of nonspherically symmetric configurations with unit winding numbers. It is natural to expect that similar configurations will exist also in a AdS geometry. In what follows, we use for the electric potentials a set of boundary conditions inspired by the MAP configurations. We impose $`H_5\mathrm{sin}\theta +H_6\mathrm{cos}\theta =0,H_{5,r}\mathrm{cos}\theta H_{6,r}\mathrm{sin}\theta =0`$ at the origin and $`H_5=V\mathrm{cos}\theta ,H_6=V\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ at infinity. The boundary conditions on the symmetry axis ($`\theta =0`$) are $`_\theta H_5=H_6=0`$, while for $`\theta =\pi /2`$ we impose $`H_5=_\theta H_6=0`$. In this letter we consider only solutions with the lowest winding number $`n=1`$.

The boundary conditions for the gauge field functions at infinity imply that the solutions have a magnetic charge $`Q_M=|1\omega _0^2|`$. The value of the electric charge can also be obtained from the asymptotics of the electric potentials, since as $`r\mathrm{}`$, $`H_5\mathrm{cos}\theta \left(V+(c_1\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +c_2)/r\right),H_6\mathrm{sin}\theta \left(V+(c_3\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +c_4)/r\right)`$.

Solutions in a fixed AdS background.–  Because the asymptotic structure of geometry is different, in an AdS spacetime one does not have to couple the YM system to scalar fields or gravity in order to obtain finite energy solutions. Here the cosmological constant breaks the scale invariance of pure YM theory to give finite energy solutions . For spherical symmetry, finite energy monopole configurations are found for only one interval of the parameter $`b`$ that specifies the initial conditions at the origin. Depending on the value of $`b`$, the gauge function $`\omega (r)`$ is nodeless or presents one node only.

We start by presenting rotating dyons solutions of YM equations in a four-dimensional AdS spacetime, gravity being regarded as a fixed field. Although being extremely simple, nevertheless this model appears to contain all the essential features of the gravitating solutions. Also, it is much easier to solve the field equations in this case.

Subject to the above boundary conditions, we solve the YM equations numerically. The numerical calculations are performed by using the program FIDISOL , based on the iterative Newton-Raphson method. To map spatial infinity to a finite value, we employ the radial coordinate $`\overline{r}=r/(r+c)`$, where $`c`$ is a properly chosen constant. As initial guess in the iteration procedure, we use the static spherically symmetric $`SU(2)`$ regular solutions in fixed AdS background . The typical relative error for the gauge functions is estimated to be lower than $`10^3`$, while the relations (4) and (7) are verified with a very good accuracy. For all the solutions we present here we consider a cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=3`$. However, a similar general behavior has been found for other negative values of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Similar to the spherically symmetric case , solutions with different values of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are related through a scaling transformation.

The solutions depend on two continuos parameters: the values $`\omega _0`$ of the magnetic potentials $`H_2,H_4`$ at infinity and the magnitude of the electric potential at infinity $`V`$. Similar to the static case, the functions $`H_2`$ and $`H_4`$ are nodeless or present one node only, although they have a small $`\theta `$ dependence. For a given $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we found nontrivial rotating solutions for every value of $`\omega _0`$. A nonvanishing $`V`$ leads to rotating regular configurations, with nontrivial functions $`H_1,H_3,H_5,H_6`$. As we increase $`V`$ from zero while keeping $`\omega _0`$ fixed, a branch of solutions forms. This branch extends up to a maximal value of $`V`$, which depends slightly on $`\omega _0`$. Along this branch, the total energy, electric charge, electric part of energy and the absolute value of the angular momentum increase continuously with $`V`$. Depending on $`V`$, the energy of a rotating solution can be several order of magnitude greater than the energy of the corresponding monopole solution. We find that both $`E_e/E`$ and $`J/E^2`$ tend to constant values as $`V`$ is increased. At the same time, the numerical errors start to increase, we obtain large values for both $`Q_e`$ and $`E`$, and for some $`V_{max}`$ the numerical iterations fail to converge. In this limit, the total energy and the electric charge diverge, while the magnetic charge takes a finite value. An accurate value of $`V_{max}`$ is rather difficult to obtain, especially for large values of $`\omega _0`$. Alternatively, we may keep fixed the magnitude of the electric potential at infinity and vary the parameter $`\omega _0`$. In Figure 1 we present the properties of typical branches of solutions for a fixed value of $`\omega _0`$ (Figure 1a) and for a fixed $`V`$ (Figure 1b).

For all configurations, the energy density $`ϵ=T_t^t`$ of the solutions has a strong peak along the $`\rho `$ axis, and it decreases monotonically along the symmetry axis, without being possible to distinguish any individual component. Equal density contours reveal a torus-like shape of the solutions. Dyon solutions are found in a good portion of $`Q_MQ_e`$ plane. There are also solutions where $`Q_M=0`$ and $`Q_e0`$. A vanishing $`Q_e`$ implies a nonrotating, purely magnetic configuration. However, we find dyon solutions with vanishing total angular momentum ($`J=0`$ for some $`\omega _0<1`$) which are not static (locally $`T_\phi ^t0`$) . Resembling the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ MAP solutions , the modulus of the electric potential $`|A_t|`$ possesses two zeros at $`\pm z_0`$, on the $`z`$ axis.

Inclusion of gravity.–  We use a metric form inspired by the asymptotically flat ansatz , which satisfies also the circularity condition

$`ds^2={\displaystyle \frac{m}{f}}({\displaystyle \frac{dr^2}{1\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}r^2}}+r^2d\theta ^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{l}{f}}r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta (d\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{r}}dt)^2f(1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}}r^2)dt^2,`$ (9)
with $`f`$, $`l`$, $`m`$ and $`\omega `$ being functions of $`r`$ and $`\theta `$. To obtain asymptotically AdS regular solutions with finite energy density, the metric functions have to satisfy the boundary conditions $`f=m=l=1,\omega =0`$ at infinity, and $`_rf=_rm=_rl=\omega =0`$ at the origin. The boundary conditions on the symmetry axis are $`_\theta f=_\theta m=_\theta l=_\theta \omega =0,`$ and agree with the boundary conditions on the $`\theta =\pi /2`$ axis. We remove the dependence on the coupling constants $`G`$ and $`e`$ from the differential equations by changing to dimensionless

Figure 1a.

Figure 1b.

Figure 1. The energy $`E`$ and the angular momentum $`J`$ (in units $`4\pi /e^2`$) of non-Abelian regular solutions in fixed AdS background with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=3`$ are shown as a function on the parameter $`V`$ (Figure 1a, for $`\omega _0=1.715`$) and the parameter $`\omega _0`$ (Figure 1b, $`V=3`$). Also shown are the electric charge $`Q_e`$ and the ratio $`E_e/E`$.
radial coordinate $`r(\sqrt{4\pi G}/e)r`$ and also $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(e^2/4\pi G)\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The dimensionless mass is obtained by rescaling $`M(eG/\sqrt{4\pi G})M`$. The ADM mass and angular momentum can be derived from the asymptotics of the metric functions .

To solve the EYM equations with a negative cosmological constant we employ the same numerical algorithm as for the YM solutions in fixed AdS background. Similar to other gravitating nonabelian configurations with axial symmetry , we use in the numerical procedure a suitable combination of the Einstein equations

$$R_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu }R+\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\mu \nu }=8\pi GT_{\mu \nu },$$
(10)
such that the diferential equations for metric variables $`(f,m,l,\omega )`$ are diagonal in the second derivatives with respect to $`r`$.

Figure 2. The metric function $`\omega (r,\theta )`$ is shown as a function of the radial coordinate $`r`$ for three fundamental branch solutions with the same $`\omega _0`$ and different values of the electric potential magnitude at infinity.
In the spherically symmetric case, gravitating regular solutions are obtained for a finite number of compact intervals of the parameter $`b`$. The properties of these solutions depend essentially on the value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The allowed values of $`b`$ for YM solutions in an AdS background with a small $`|\mathrm{\Lambda }|`$ correspond approximately to the lower branch when coupling to gravity.

We start with a $`n=1`$ purely magnetic EYM solution obtained in isotropic coordinates  as initial guess and increase the value of $`V`$ slowly (for a fixed $`\omega _0`$). We constructed in this way gravitating dyon solutions with nonvanishing angular momentum for a range of ($`\mathrm{\Lambda },\omega _0,V`$). The branch structure of the spherically symmetric solutions is preserved in the presence of rotation. When gravity is coupled to YM theory, a branch of gravitating dyon solutions emerges smoothly from the dyon solutions of AdS space and extending up to some maximal value of $`V`$ beyond which gravity becomes too strong for regular dyons to persist. This value is always smaller than the corresponding value in a fixed AdS background. These lowest branch solutions are of particular interest because some of them are likely to be stable against linear perturbations. For small values of the cosmological constant (typically $`|\mathrm{\Lambda }|<10^1`$), the basic properties of these fundamental gravitating solutions are similar to those of the solutions in the absence of gravity. The general picture presented in Figure 1 provides a good qualitative description in this case too. We notice that the value at the origin of the metric function $`f`$ decreases with increasing $`V`$ and tends to zero as $`V`$ approaches the critical value $`V_{max}`$, corresponding to the formation of a horizon.

Also, for the studied configurations we find that the total mass of a gravitating solution has a smaller value than the mass of the corresponding solution in a fixed AdS background. This inequality is of course in accord with our intuition that gravity tends to reduce the mass. A similar property has been noticed for monopole solutions in a spontaneously broken gauge theory . As expected, the gauge functions $`H_i`$ look very similar to those of the corresponding (pure-) YM solutions. With increasing $`V`$, the dyon becomes more and more deformed. The form of the non-diagonal metric function $`\omega `$ clearly demonstrates the differential rotation of different portions of these torus-like configurations (see Figure 2).

Beside these fundamental gravitating solutions, EYM theory with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$ may possess also excited solutions not presented in a fixed AdS background. These solutions are obtained by starting with an excited- sherically symmetric EYM monopole solution , and slowly increasing the value of $`V`$. We motice the existence of higher node configurations in this case, the maximal node number depending on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

For higher branches solutions, we find the same general picture. The mass, angular momentum and electric charges increase with $`V`$ and we find again a maximal value for the magnitude of the electric potential at infinity. Again, as the critical value of $`V`$ is approached, the metric function $`f`$ develops a zero at the origin, corresponding to the formation of a horizon. Also, we find that the metric functions ($`f,l,m`$) of the excited EYM solutions are considerably smaller at the origin, and the gauge field functions have their peaks and nodes shifted inwards, as compared to the corresponding first branch solutions. Higher branches rotating solutions are more difficult to obtain. The numerical error for gravitating configurations is estimated to be on the order of $`10^3`$ for first branch solutions and $`10^2`$ in rest. This error depends also on the values of $`\omega _0`$ and $`V`$.

However, for large values of $`|\mathrm{\Lambda }|`$, the picture presented in Figure 1b is no longer valid even for fundamental gravitating solutions. For example, we find in this case a minimal allowed value for the parameter $`\omega _0`$ and the absence of higher branches solutions. These differences emerge from the distinctions existing already in the spherically symmetric case (with $`V=0`$), distinctions not yet discussed in the literature.

More details on these rotating regular solutions will be given elsewhere.

Further remarks.–  We found that the gravitating rotating solitons depend nontrivially on the value of the cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. As discussed in , the higher branches of gravitating monopoles with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$ are related to Bartnik-McKinnon (BM) solutions . Naively, one may expect that the corresponding rotating dyon configurations are also related to rotating generalizations of BM solutions. In this limit the asymptotics of the electric potential simplifies: $`c_1=c_3=0,c_2=c_4`$ and therefore $`J/Q_e=const.`$ as predicted in . Nevertheless, we find numerically that, in the limit $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$, the maximal value of $`V`$ also tends to zero and, for higher branches, we recover the nonrotating BM solution (while the fundamental branch approaches the vacuum solution). Although further research is clearly necessary, it seems that for an axially symmetric regular configuration with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, similar to the spherically symmetric case, the electric part of the axially symmetric gauge fields is forbidden if the ADM mass is to remain finite. If $`V0`$, the $`A_t^a`$ components of the gauge field act like an isotriplet Higgs field with negative metric, and by themselves would cause the other components of the gauge field to oscillate as $`r\mathrm{}`$ .

A simple way to remedy this fact is to include a triplet Higgs field in the theory. The Higgs field functions will satisfy a set of boundary conditions similar to the corresponding electric YM potentials. However, the magnitude of the Higgs field at infinity should be greater that $`V`$. This configuration will correspond to an asymptotically flat, rotating MAP solution first predicted in , with a vanishing net magnetic charge but with a nonzero electric charge. In this case too, the electric charge and the angular momentum are not independent quantities any longer .

Also, the existence of other branches of asymptotically AdS rotating regular solutions, not necessarily connected to the static solutions might be possible.
Acknowledgement
The author is grateful to Prof. J.J. van der Bij for useful discussions. The professional observations of the anonymous referee are also acknowledged.
This work was performed in the context of the Graduiertenkolleg of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG): Nichtlineare Differentialgleichungen: Modellierung,Theorie, Numerik, Visualisierung.


format: text

text:
# Invisible Higgs Boson Decay into Massive Neutrinos of 4th Generation

## Abstract

Results from several recent experiments provide indirect evidences in the favor of existence of a 4th generation neutrino. Such a neutrino of mass m about 50 GeV is compatible with current physical and astrophysical constraints and well motivated in the framework of superstring phenomenology. If sufficiently stable the existence of such a neutrino leads to the drastic change of Higgs boson physics: for a wide range of Higgs boson masses the dominant mode of Higgs boson decay is invisible and the branching ratios for the most promising modes of Higgs boson search are significantly reduced. The proper strategy of Higgs boson searches in such a framework is discussed. It is shown that in the same framework the absence of a signal in the search for invisible Higgs boson decay at LEP means either that the mass of the Higgs ($`M_H`$) is greater than 113.5 GeV or that the mass difference $`|M_H2m|`$ is small.

: Centre for Cosmoparticle physics ”Cosmion”, Miusskaya Pl. 4, 125047, Moscow, Russia
: Physics department, Universita’ degli studi ”La Sapienza”, 5, Piazzale Aldo Moro - I 00185 Roma, Italy; INFN Roma, Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Italy
<sup>#</sup>: Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics, Miusskaya Pl. 4, 125047, Moscow, Russia
: Department of Physics, New York University, New York, NY 10003; Department of Physics, Manhattan College, Riverdale, New York, NY 10471

The existence of Higgs boson is the necessary consequence of Higgs mechanism of electroweak symmetry breaking. Proportionality of its Yukawa coupling constants to fermion mass is its important property. Such property is shared by wider class of models of electroweak symmetry breaking. For example, it is shared by technipion in Technicolor models. So the existence of scalar boson with Yukawa coupling constants proportional to fermion masses seems to be a general feature of electroweak symmetry breaking mechanisms in the standard model. The possibility for the existence of new heavy elusive fermions, dominating in Higgs boson decays, leads to drastic change in the strategy of Higgs boson searches. The idea on the dominant invisible modes of Higgs boson decays was discussed in the framework of Majoron, SUSY and low scale gravity models in  (and references therein), however the simplest possibility is the existence of massive neutrino of 4th generation. The measured Z-boson width excludes the existence of 4th neutrino with the mass below 45 GeV. However, the detailed analysis of 4th generation effects in the standard model parameters opens the window for its existence, provided that the mass of 4th neutrino is below around W-boson mass . A fit  of the precision electroweak data is compatible with the 4th generation neutrino mass $`m`$ 50 GeV. However, the allowed range for 4th neutrino masses may be wider, if the 4th neutrino is not accompanied by 4th generation quarks (as it can take place in Dp-brane phenomenology, naturally excluding quarks of 4th generation but leaving the room for the 4th generation of leptons ). It even can not be accompanied by a charged lepton, as it is assumed in some models of neutrino mass . Provided that it is sufficiently metastable, or it has only invisible decay modes, 4th neutrino with the mass around 50 GeV could escape detection by products of its decay in LEP. The possibility  to analyze the LEP data on single gamma events, corresponding to a 4th neutrino pair production in the reaction $`e^+e^{}N\overline{N}\gamma `$ for $`m>50`$ GeV is still not realized.

If 4th neutrino is sufficiently long-living or even absolutely stable its primordial gas from the early Universe can survive to the present time and concentrate in the Galaxy , . It was shown  that galactic fluxes of 4th neutrino can lead to the effect of indirect WIMP searches compatible with the DAMA data, and the effects of 4th neutrino-antineutrino annihilation in the Galaxy can explain ,  the galactic gamma background with energies above 1 GeV, observed by EGRET. The latter possibility is strengthened, provided that the 4th generation quarks and leptons possess the new strictly conserved gauge charge, as it can naturally follow from heterotic string phenomenology . In that case 4th neutrino annihilation in Galaxy can explain the positron anomaly in electron component of cosmic rays , . It was shown  that the capture of 4th neutrinos by Earth can lead to the underground neutrino flux, accessible, in principle, to underground neutrino detectors.

In the present note we draw attention to the important role, 4th neutrino can play in the physics of Higgs boson. The probability of Higgs boson decay into $`N\overline{N}`$ pair is given by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(HN\overline{N})=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{8\pi }Gm^2M_H\left(1\frac{4m^2}{M_H^2}\right)^{3/2},$$
(1)
where $`G`$ is the Fermi constant, $`m`$ and $`M_H`$ are the masses of the neutrino and Higgs boson respectively. This mode should be compared with the probabilities of the most important $`b\overline{b}`$ and $`WW`$ modes of Higgs boson decay.

In Fig.1 the dependence on Higgs boson mass for branching ratios for these decay modes and other most contributing modes is given for two values of the neutrino mass, $`m=50`$ GeV (Fig 1a) and $`m=70`$ GeV (Fig 1b). One easily finds, that the dominance of $`N\overline{N}`$ mode in the Higgs boson width for Higgs boson masses up to 160 GeV naturally follows from the fact that the mass of $`N`$ is by the order of magnitude larger than the mass of b-quark also taking into account the number of colored quark states in the b-mode (3), a reduction factor $`2`$ due to QCD corrections  and the phase volume difference for $`N\overline{N}`$ and $`b\overline{b}`$ channels. It leads to the branching ratio of $`N\overline{N}`$ channel between 90 and 95 per cent in the total Higgs boson width, if the mass of Higgs boson is below the threshold for $`WW`$ mode. However, even at higher masses of Higgs boson the 4th neutrino channel is significant. Note that if the masses of 4th lepton and 4th generation quarks are near the existing lower limits, the respective decay modes would be important for the Higgs boson mass above 260 GeV. In the considered Higgs boson mass range the 4th generation fermions affect Higgs decay modes $`H\mathrm{gg},\gamma \gamma `$ by loop diagrams. Here their probabilities were estimated assuming 4th charge lepton mass $`m_E=100`$ GeV, 4th up- and down- quark masses $`m_U=m_D=130`$ GeV. It takes into account the difference in probabilities of these decays in comparison with previous analogous estimates for three fermion generations.

In the case, when the $`N\overline{N}`$ decay mode dominates, Higgs boson search can be effectively undertaken in the search for acoplanar lepton pairs or acoplanar jets, arising from the Higgs-struhlung reaction ,

$$e^+e^{}ZH$$
(2)
with successive Z-boson decay into charged lepton pair, and elusive Higgs boson decay into the pair of $`N\overline{N}`$. The total cross section for this reaction is given by

$$\sigma (e^+e^{}ZH)=\frac{(g_V^2+g_A^2)G^2M_Z^6}{6\pi \sqrt{s}}\frac{|\stackrel{}{q_1}|}{(sM_Z^2)^2+M_Z^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z^2}\left(1+\frac{1}{2}\frac{q_{10}^2}{M_Z^2}\right),$$
(3)
where $`g_V=1+4\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W`$, $`g_A=1`$, $`q_{10}=(s+M_Z^2M_H^2)/(2\sqrt{s})`$, $`s`$ being squared center-mass energy, $`|\stackrel{}{q_1}|=\sqrt{q_{10}^2M_Z^2}`$. The differential cross section for charged leptons from successive Z-boson decay is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{l_0d\sigma _\pm }{d^3l}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2^5\pi ^2}}\beta _N\beta _l{\displaystyle \frac{M_Z^4G^2D_Z}{C_V}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{s}l_0}}\{2l_0(q_{10}l_0)C_V^2C_A^2M_Z^2cos\theta +`$ (4)
$`+\mathrm{cos}^2\theta C_V^2[M_Z^22l_0(q_{10}l_0)]\},`$
where $`C_V=g_V^2+g_A^2`$, $`C_A=2g_Vg_A`$, $`D_Z=\frac{1}{(sM_Z^2)^2+M_Z^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_Z^2}`$, $`\beta _N`$ and $`\beta _l`$ are the $`HNN`$ and $`Zl^+l^{}`$ branching ratios respectively, $`\theta `$ is the angle between momenta of the initial electron and the final negative lepton, the kinematic limits of the considered process are $`M_Z+M_H\sqrt{s}`$, $`\frac{1}{2}[q_{10}\left|\stackrel{}{q_1}\right|]l_0\frac{1}{2}[q_{10}+\left|\stackrel{}{q_1}\right|]`$. The above formulae can be used for the case of visible modes of Z-boson decay to $`\mu \overline{\mu }`$ and $`\tau \overline{\tau }`$, as well as for 2-jet events from quark antiquark channels of Z-boson decay (replacing $`C_V`$, $`C_A`$ by appropriate values and taking into account 3 color degrees of freedom). In the case of electron-positron mode of Z-boson decay an interference diagram should be taken into account.

Fig.2 shows the total cross sections of $`\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ pair production for the Higgs-struhlung reaction (Eq.2) with the Higgs boson decaying invisibly into $`N\overline{N}`$ of mass 50 GeV. One can see that the total cross section is within the range of LEP collider. The LEP working group presented results of a search for a Higgs boson, produced at the Standard Model rate, decaying into invisible particles ,. No statistically significant excess has been observed when compared to a background prediction. Assuming that the Higgs boson decays only into invisible states a lower bound has been set on its mass at 95% CL of 114.4 GeV . In the case of 4th generation neutrino of $`m=50`$ GeV taking into account the branching ratios one can infer from the LEP data  the lower limit on Higgs mass $``$ 113.5 GeV. If a 4th generation neutrino of mass $`m50`$ GeV exists then the absence of the signal at LEP means either that the mass of the Higgs $`M_H>113.5`$ GeV or that the mass difference $`\left|2mM_H\right|`$ is small leading to a significant phase space suppression of the invisible Higgs decays.

Actually, the predicted effect of elusive Higgs boson assumes the lifetime of 4th neutrino to be $`>10^7`$ sec. If this lifetime exceeds the age of the Universe, astrophysical search for 4th neutrino effects will be of special interest. It turns out that the inverse effect of Higgs boson on the predicted astrophysical effects of 4th neutrinos is restricted by the very narrow interval of 4th neutrino and Higgs mass ratio . The mass difference between $`2m`$ and $`M_H`$ should be negative and less than 3-4 GeV to influence significantly the primordial $`N\overline{N}`$ concentration owing to the Higgs boson channel of their annihilation in the period of their freezing out in early Universe. So, for the mass of neutrino 50 GeV and the Higgs boson mass 114 GeV the role of Higgs boson is elusive in the calculations of 4th neutrino freezing out in the early Universe, as well as in the effects of 4th neutrino annihilation in the Galaxy. The detailed discussion of Higgs boson effect on the astrophysical signatures of 4th neutrinos will be given in a separate paper.

To conclude, the existence of scalar boson with Yukava coupling proportional to fermion mass is the important signature for the mechanism of electroweak symmetry breaking. The existence of massive 4th neutrino makes elusive the dominant mode of decay of this boson, and the strategy of Higgs boson search should take into account this possibility. In particular, the presented results mean that for LHC in the mass region $`M_H`$ $`115160`$ GeV the gluon fusion process $`\mathrm{gg}\mathrm{H}`$ is not dominating and one has to search for lepton or jet pair + missing energy from reactions $`qqqqH,WH,ZH`$. The positive result of such search will not only prove one of the corner stones of the standard model, but it will also prove the existence of physics beyond the standard model, as well as it will make the hypothesis of 4th neutrino deserving serious attention. The experimental proof that the ratio of the elusive mode to b-quark one of Higgs boson decay is as it is predicted for 4th neutrino will strongly favor this hypothesis as compared with other possible models for invisible Higgs boson. The set of astrophysical signatures provides the complete test of the hypothesis on massive stable 4th neutrino.

The work was partially performed in the framework of Russian State contract $`\mathrm{40.022.1.1.1106}`$, with partial support of Cosmion-ETHZ, AMS-Epcos collaborations, of grant $`001596699`$ of support for Russian scientific schools, RFBR grant $`020217490`$ and of grant of Russian Universities. One of us (M.Yu.Kh) expresses his gratitude to Rome University “La Sapienza” and to IHES for hospitality.


text:
# Acceleration and Parallax Effects in Gravitational Microlensing

## 1 Introduction

A decade ago Gould (1992) suggested that the Earth’s orbital motion may affect long duration events of gravitational microlensing, producing a periodic modulation of the event light curve. The first such example of this behaviour was detected by Alcock et al. (1995), and a number of additional events have been reported by several groups (e.g., Mao 1999; Smith, Mao & Woźniak 2002a; Bennett et al. 2002a; Bond et al. 2001). However, most of these events were of relatively short duration and showed a strong asymmetry in the light curves, rather than a yearly modulation. Two events were long enough to make a yearly modulation clearly noticeable: OGLE-1999-BUL-32 = MACHO-99-BLG-22 (Mao et al. 2002; Bennett et al. 2002b) and OGLE-1999-BUL-19 (Smith et al. 2002b).

While the Earth’s motion may generate a photometric parallax effect, a similar anomaly may be due to binary motion of the source (sometimes referred to as ‘xallarap’; Griest & Hu 1992; Han & Gould 1997; Paczyński 1997) and/or the lens. In fact such a binary-source modulation was detected in the microlensing event MACHO-SMC-1 (Alcock et al. 1997; Palanque-Delabrouille et al. 1998; Udalski et al. 1997) and MACHO 96-LMC-2 (Alcock et al. 2001). While in these two cases the binary source period was much shorter than the event time scale, an alternative situation may also be encountered. In fact, Smith et al. (2002b) pointed out that even in the case of a very long event exhibiting an annual modulation of its light curve, a model based on a binary source moving with a one year orbital period and suitable inclination and orientation of the orbit may generate a light curve identical to that expected from the parallax effect. While such a coincidence is very unlikely, it is also verifiable in that a binary source should display periodic variations in its radial velocities.

As most parallax microlensing events are not very long it is likely that the effects they show may be well described with a constant acceleration of the Earth, the lens and/or the source, with no need to invoke a specific orbit. The aim of this paper is to investigate this possibility and to present several consequences of the proposed approach. In Section 2 we describe a simple model that incorporates a constant-acceleration term into the microlensing formalism. We then test the efficacy of this model in Section 3 by fitting a number of microlensing events that have been previously identified as exhibiting variations from the standard constant-velocity model of microlensing. The events that we have selected were all identified as potential parallax microlensing events, and in this section we aim to test whether this constant-acceleration model is able to successfully reproduce this behaviour. In this section we also mention that there is a generic degeneracy with the constant-acceleration model, and that there may be an equivalent degeneracy for parallax models. In Section 4 we summarise our work and discuss some of the implications of our findings. In particular, we note that the effect of constant-acceleration perturbations is likely to be of little importance for binary lenses, and such perturbations are therefore most-likely to be due to accelerations of the observer and/or the source.

## 2 A simple Model

In the simplest case of a microlensing event, the light curve is calculated assuming that the relative motion of the source, the lens, and the observer is linear and constant (Paczyński 1986). The next step in allowing for a more complicated relative motion is to expand it in a power series, and to retain the first two terms, i.e. the velocity, $`𝐯`$, and the acceleration, $`𝐚`$. For the purposes of this paper, we define the velocity, $`𝐯`$, to be the velocity of the lens relative to the observer-source line-of-sight. This acceleration is therefore a relative acceleration, but since the following analysis is likely to be valid only for lenses in inertial motion (see Section 4), this acceleration can be thought of as the acceleration of the observer and/or the source. An acceleration related velocity vector may be defined as $`𝐯_𝐚=𝐚t_\mathrm{E}`$, where $`t_\mathrm{E}`$ is the event time scale: $`t_\mathrm{E}=r_\mathrm{E}/v`$, $`r_\mathrm{E}`$ is the Einstein radius and $`v`$ is the velocity at the minimum separation (peak magnification). We expect that any ‘anomaly’ in the light curve will depend on two dimensionless numbers: the ratio of the two velocities: $`𝒜=v_a/v`$, and the angle between them $`\theta `$. Notice $`𝒜`$ is simply the physical acceleration in units of $`r_\mathrm{E}/t_\mathrm{E}^2`$.

In general, an acceleration will produce asymmetry in the microlensing light curve, and this is the effect which is used to select parallax events. However, if the acceleration is mostly in the direction perpendicular to the velocity vector $`𝐯`$ then there will be no asymmetry, just a change in the shape that may be difficult to notice.

Fig. 1 shows four example light curves with different accelerations. All four cases have a minimum impact parameter of $`u_0=0.1`$, and the source is assumed to move along the $`x`$-axis in the absence of acceleration. The dimensionless acceleration parameters along the $`x`$ and $`y`$ directions, $`𝒜_x`$ and $`𝒜_y`$, are indicated in each panel. The top left panel shows a light curve in which the acceleration is $`45^{}`$ from the $`x`$-axis while the bottom left panel shows an example where the acceleration is in the same direction as the source motion. As expected, both light curves show clear asymmetries. The two right panels show light curves in which the acceleration is perpendicular to the $`x`$-axis. The light curves are symmetric in such cases. The effect of acceleration may not be noticed, and a standard fit forced upon the event may generate incorrect values of the impact parameter and the event time scale; we return to this issue briefly in the discussion. A thorough analysis of all such possibilities in current experiments is beyond the scope of this paper. Instead, we concentrate on the readily available candidate parallax events, in order to check how many of them can be well fitted by adding an acceleration vector to the standard model.

## 3 Analysis of Candidate Parallax Microlensing Events Using A Constant Acceleration Model

In this section we implement the above constant-acceleration microlensing model and test its efficacy by fitting a number of microlensing events. By analysing previously identified candidate parallax microlensing events, we aim to investigate whether this constant-acceleration model is able to suitably reproduce the observed (i.e. seemingly parallactic) behaviour.

### 3.1 Constant Acceleration Model

We shall first outline the standard constant-velocity microlensing model. For the standard microlensing light curve, the source position (in units of Einstein radius) is given by

$$x=\frac{tt_0}{t_\mathrm{E}}x_0(t),y=u_0,$$
(1)
where $`t_0`$ is the time of maximum magnification and $`u_0`$ is the corresponding (minimum) impact parameter. The magnification is given by (Paczyński 1986)

$$A(t)=\frac{u^2+2}{u\sqrt{u^2+4}},u=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}.$$
(2)
With acceleration, the $`(x,y)`$ coordinates must be modified to

$$x=x_0(t)+\frac{1}{2}𝒜\mathrm{cos}\theta x_0^2(t),y=u_0+\frac{1}{2}𝒜\mathrm{sin}\theta x_0^2(t),$$
(3)
where $`x_0(t)`$ is defined in eq. (1), $`𝒜`$ is the physical acceleration in units of $`r_\mathrm{E}/t_\mathrm{E}^2`$, and the magnification is again calculated using eq. (2). Notice that, since the transverse velocity changes, $`t_\mathrm{E}`$ should be understood as the Einstein radius crossing time corresponding to the transverse velocity $`v`$ at time $`t_0`$. Also, in general, $`u_0`$ may no longer rigorously be the minimum impact parameter, but may still provide a useful approximation, particularly if $`𝒜`$ is small.

To fit a microlensing light curve with the standard model, one needs a minimum of four parameters, $`u_0`$, $`t_0`$, $`t_\mathrm{E}`$, and the baseline flux (or magnitude), $`f_0`$. One also often requires an extra blending parameter, which accounts for the additional light contributed by the lens and/or other stars in the crowded field. To do this, we use a parameter, $`f_\mathrm{s}`$, defined as the fraction of light contributed by the lensed source at the baseline. To incorporate the constant acceleration, we need two extra parameters, $`𝒜`$ and the angle $`\theta `$ (or equivalently, $`𝒜_x`$ and $`𝒜_y`$).

We look for any degeneracy in the parameter space for this constant-acceleration model by fitting each event 1000 times, with the initial parameter guesses selected from wide range of randomly chosen values. We find that two sets of parameters exist for each $`\chi ^2`$ minimum. The parameters are identical except for the time-scale, $`t_\mathrm{E}`$, and the acceleration parameters, $`𝒜`$ and $`\theta `$. However, the magnitude of the physical acceleration in units of $`r_\mathrm{E}/\mathrm{day}^2`$ (i.e., $`\left|𝐚/r_\mathrm{E}\right|=𝒜/t_\mathrm{E}^2`$, as defined in §2) is the same for both fits, although the direction of this vector (i.e., $`\theta `$) differs. In Appendix A1, we show that this degeneracy can be understood analytically. An example of this degeneracy is illustrated in the inset of Fig. 2 for the microlensing event sc6\_2563; even though the two trajectories look very different they both result in identical light curves. The full analysis of the event sc6\_2563 is described in Section 3.2.1.

It should be noted that one may expect this degeneracy to manifest itself in parallax models. In particular, this could be important for short-duration events that exhibit weak parallax signatures, since in this case the Earth’s acceleration can be approximated to be constant (i.e. the regime in which this degeneracy is expected to occur). By testing this hypothesis on the event sc6\_2563, we are able to verify the existence of this degeneracy. However, it seems that this may only become apparent for weak parallax candidates, since a more convincing parallax candidate (sc33\_4505; Section 3.2.3) shows no such degeneracy (see Appendix A). A full discussion of this degeneracy, including the application to events sc6\_2563 and sc33\_4505, can be found in Appendix A2.

### 3.2 Analysis of candidate parallax microlensing events

We proceed by analysing a selection of events that have previously been identified as candidate parallax microlensing events. The parallax model used here requires 7 parameters: the 5 parameters from the standard model plus two additional parameters to describe the lens trajectory in the ecliptic plane, namely the Einstein radius projected onto the observer plane, $`\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{E}`$, and an angle $`\psi `$ in the ecliptic plane. $`\psi `$ is defined as the angle between the heliocentric ecliptic $`x`$-axis and the normal to the trajectory (This geometry is illustrated in Fig. 5 of Soszyński et al. 2001). These candidate parallax events have been selected to provide a broad range of parallactic signatures, ranging from marginal cases to those displaying more prominent effects.

#### 3.2.1 sc6\_2563

This event was detected by the OGLE collaboration (Udalski et al. 2000). Its asymmetric nature was identified during a parallax search of the OGLE-II database (Woźniak et al. 2001), reported in Smith et al. (2002a). It was classified as a ‘marginal’ candidate, since the deviations from the standard model are not particularly pronounced and the improvement in $`\chi ^2`$ is only slight. The best-fit parameters for the standard and parallax models are given in Table 1, and the corresponding light curves are plotted in Fig. 2. The inset of this figure shows the two degenerate trajectories for the constant-acceleration model; as was discussed above, each $`\chi ^2`$ minimum has two degenerate fits. Both of these trajectories produce identical light curves, even though the parameter values for $`t_\mathrm{E}`$, $`𝒜`$ and $`\theta `$ differ. This table also includes an additional parallax fit, which has a $`\chi ^2`$ difference of 0.8 compared to the best-fit parallax model. This is a manifestation of the parallax degeneracy that is analogous to this constant-acceleration degeneracy. See Section 3.1 and Appendix A for a discussion of these degeneracies.

It would be expected that a constant-acceleration fit may be suitable for this event since the duration is not very long, and the asymmetry shows no signs of modulation. Indeed, when this event is fit with the above constant-acceleration model the best-fit $`\chi ^2`$ value improves upon the best-fit parallax value from 347.4 to 332.6. If the error bars are rescaled so that the best-fit $`\chi ^2`$ per degree of freedom is renormalised to unity, then the difference in $`\chi ^2`$ between these two fits is 9.5 for no additional free parameters, i.e. a significant 3-$`\sigma `$ improvement. The best-fit parameters and corresponding light curve for the acceleration model are given in Table 1 and Fig. 2, respectively. From this figure it is clear that the parallax and constant-acceleration models produce similar fits. However, both models seem to over-predict the flux around $`1000<t<1150`$ days, implying that there may be some non-constant contribution to the acceleration that is not parallactic in nature. Notice that the standard microlensing model predicts a blending parameter $`f_\mathrm{s}0.8`$ while other models predict $`f_\mathrm{s}1`$. Correspondingly, the Einstein radius crossing time is about 25% larger for the standard model than for the other models; this has implications for the optical depth estimate in the experiments (see Section 4).

#### 3.2.2 OGLE-1999-CAR-1

This event was detected in real-time by the OGLE Early Warning System111http://www.astrouw.edu.pl/~ogle/ogle3/ews/ews.html (Udalski et al. 1994) toward the Carina spiral arm. It has been found to exhibit systematic deviations from the standard model (Mao 1999). The duration for this event is well over 100 days, and it was concluded that these deviations are due to the parallax effect.

As with sc6\_2563, the deviations from the standard model for OGLE-1999-CAR-1 show no signs of modulation, and so one would expect that this event may be suitably approximated by a constant acceleration model. This appears to be correct, since the best-fit constant-acceleration model is able to prove a very similar fit (with a slightly worse $`\chi ^2`$ value of 619.4 compared with the parallax best-fit value of 614.8). The best-fit parameters for all models are given in Table 2, and the corresponding light curves are shown in Fig. 3. It is interesting to note that both of the degenerate acceleration fits have values of $`𝒜=v_a/v`$ greater than 1 ($`𝒜=1.4`$, and $`𝒜=2.4`$). This implies that $`v_a`$, the change in velocity due to this constant acceleration in a time $`t_\mathrm{E}`$, is greater than the $`v`$, the velocity at the point of closest approach.

Also of note is the difference in $`t_\mathrm{E}`$ among the three models. The values range from $`t_\mathrm{E}=126`$ days for the parallax model, to as much as $`t_\mathrm{E}=190`$ days for the constant-acceleration model. These differences in the time-scale are closely connected with their differences of the blending parameter, due to potential degeneracy between these two parameters (Woźniak & Paczyński 1997).

#### 3.2.3 sc33\_4505

This OGLE-II event was also found during the search of Smith et al. (2002a), but was classified as a ‘convincing’ parallax candidate. Unlike sc6\_2563, the duration of this event was much longer ($`t_\mathrm{E}200`$ days, cf. $`t_\mathrm{E}100`$ days for sc6\_2563), and the data show clear signs of deviation from the standard model in both the rising and declining branch of the light curve. Therefore, if this asymmetry is indeed due to the parallax effect then one would suspect that a constant-acceleration model would be unable to reproduce this behaviour (since the acceleration of the Earth cannot be considered constant during this time span). On the other hand, if this asymmetry is due to other causes, the constant-acceleration model may provide a better fit.

The best-fit parameters for the standard and parallax models are given in Table 3, and the corresponding light curves are shown in Fig. 4. A problem arises when this event is fit with the constant-acceleration model, in that two minima are identified, with $`\chi ^2=187.3`$ and $`\chi ^2=227.3`$, respectively. Due to the degeneracy discussed in §3 and Appendix A1, there are two degenerate fits corresponding to each of these two $`\chi ^2`$ values. The two degenerate fits that correspond to $`\chi ^2=187.3`$ have extremely large time-scales ($`t_\mathrm{E}=1812.8\mathrm{day}`$ and $`t_\mathrm{E}=4880.5\mathrm{day}`$), and the lensed star contributes only 2.3 per cent of the total baseline light (i.e., $`f_\mathrm{s}=0.023`$). These values do not seem physical to us, and therefore the fits corresponding to this $`\chi ^2`$ minimum are disregarded. The best-fit parameters for the two degenerate fits corresponding to $`\chi ^2=227.3`$ are more ‘feasible’; they are given in Table 3 and the corresponding light curve is shown in Fig. 4.

However, the discarded ‘unfeasible’ constant-acceleration models have an overall best $`\chi ^2`$ value (187.3). Since this $`\chi ^2`$ value is better than the best-fit parallax model, it highlights that there could be a deficiency in the parallax fit. This deficiency in the parallax fit can be seen in the residual plot in Fig. 4; systematic residuals from the parallax model can clearly be seen, and the remaining ‘feasible’ constant-acceleration fit is also unable to successfully reproduce this behaviour.

These residuals from the parallax model could imply that this event is exhibiting some weak binary-source signatures (see, for example, Alcock et al. 2001). We performed a preliminary investigation to test this hypothesis, fitting the event with a simple binary-source model. The basic details of this model can be found in Smith et al. (2002b), but the version used here has two differences from the earlier work: firstly, it incorporates the parallax motion of the Earth (which, in most cases, should have an effect on the light curve since the duration of this event is well over one year222It should be noted that the parallax effect is expected to be negligible in the case of binary-source microlensing when the lens and sources both lie in the bulge, so-called bulge-bulge lensing.); and secondly, only face-on elliptical orbits are considered.

The best binary-source plus parallax fit that we are able to identify has a much better $`\chi ^2`$ value ($`\chi ^2=162.4`$) compared to all of the previous models. However, we find a range of possible binary-source fits with $`\chi ^2`$ less than 180. The single best-fit solution is presented in Table 4 and Fig. 4. This model predicts a very large value for the Einstein radius projected into the observer plane ($`\stackrel{~}{r}_\mathrm{E}=108`$ au), which implies that the parallax motion of the Earth has little effect on the light curve, i.e., the majority of the perturbations from the standard model arise due to the binary nature of the source. It seems that this model is able to fit the systematic residuals from the parallax model, although it predicts peculiar bumps in the light curve (most notably during the break between observing seasons). We present this model to show that such fits are possible, but we do not attempt a more detailed analysis of this event in this work.

If this event is indeed affected by the binary motion of the source then a spectroscopic followup should find the source to be a spectroscopic binary, and this would reduce the number of free parameters in our model. Furthermore, if the projected separation of the two sources can be estimated, then this would enable us to make a direct determination of the lens mass (Han & Gould 1997). The source baseline magnitude (including blending) is about $`I=15.7`$ mag, and so it should be within easy reach of modern large telescopes.

#### 3.2.4 OGLE-1999-BUL-19 and OGLE-1999-BUL-32/MACHO-99-BUL-22

These two events display unambiguous deviations from the standard model. They were detected by the OGLE Early Warning System (with OGLE-1999-BUL-32 being independently detected by the MACHO collaboration’s Alert System333 http://darkstar.astro.washington.edu/, by which it was named MACHO-99-BUL-22). Both of these events also appear in the difference image analysis catalogue of Woźniak et al. (2001), and are labelled sc40\_2895 and sc33\_3764, respectively. For the purposes of this paper, we fit these events using the OGLE difference image analysis data from Woźniak et al. (2001).

OGLE-1999-BUL-19 (Smith et al. 2002b) displays prominent multiple peaks that are well fit by a parallax model, while OGLE-1999-BUL-32 (Mao et al. 2002; Bennett et al. 2002b) is the longest duration event ever discovered. Both events are suitably fit by the parallax model, and both show significant improvement in $`\chi ^2`$ between the standard and parallax models.

Since the microlensing amplification for both of these events lasts well over two years, we expect that a constant-acceleration model may not be adequate to describe their behaviour. By fitting with the constant-acceleration model we find that this is true; neither of these events are well fit. The best-fit $`\chi ^2`$ values for these events are given in Table 5. For OGLE-1999-BUL-19, the $`\chi ^2`$ for the constant-acceleration model is 11420, which is far worse than the parallax model of 590.1. Similarly, for OGLE-1999-BUL-32, the $`\chi ^2`$ for the constant acceleration model is 464.4 compared with 278.2 for the parallax model.

## 4 Discussion

In this paper, we have illustrated the effect of acceleration on microlensing light curves. We studied whether the known parallax microlensing events can be equally fitted by a model with a constant acceleration. We found that for the shorter marginal parallax microlensing events, the constant acceleration is indeed sufficient. However, for the longest events (notably, OGLE-1999-BUL-32 and OGLE-1999-BUL-19), the constant acceleration fails to provide a satisfactory model, so their parallax nature seems secure.

It is important to examine whether there is an empirical way of separating ‘parallax events’ from ‘microlensing events with acceleration’. For binary lenses it can be shown that such constant-acceleration perturbations are unlikely to be of importance. This can be understood by considering three regimes of binary lenses separately: close binaries (i.e., those with separation $`br_\mathrm{E}`$), intermediate binaries ($`br_\mathrm{E}`$), and wide binaries ($`br_\mathrm{E}`$). One would expect sufficiently large accelerations for close separation binaries. However, unless the impact parameter is extremely small (i.e. the source passes very close to the centre of mass of the lens), it is unlikely that the resulting light curve will be differentiable from a standard single-lens light curve (Gaudi & Gould 1997). Even in the rare cases where such small impact parameters occur, one would expect the primary deviations to be caused by the binary structure, rather than the acceleration (for example, the binary-lens event MACHO-99-BLG-47, Albrow et al. 2002). For intermediate binaries where the separation is of the order of the Einstein radius, one would also expect the primary deviations to arise from the binary structure, rather than the acceleration. Even in the absence of caustic crossings, the effect of acceleration should be relatively small compared to the distortion of the light curve due to the other mass (For example, typical lens geometries - with the source lying in the bulge at a distance of approximately $`8\mathrm{kpc}`$ and the lens lying half-way in between - predict $`r_\mathrm{E}4\mathrm{au}(M_{\mathrm{lens}}/M_{})^{1/2}`$, where $`M_{\mathrm{lens}}`$ is the total lens mass; therefore, for face-on orbits with separations of approximately $`1r_\mathrm{E}`$, a typical orbital period is $`P8\mathrm{yr}(M_{\mathrm{lens}}/M_{})^{1/4}`$, which implies that the resulting acceleration should produce only weak perturbations to the light curve compared to the distortion from the companion mass). For the case of wide separation binaries, it is clear that the accelerations should be small compared to the Earth’s acceleration, since binaries with separation much greater than $`r_\mathrm{E}`$ are expected to have orbital periods of longer than 8 years. Therefore, we conclude that the effect of constant accelerations in binary lenses is unlikely to be of importance.

In principle, there is a simple test to determine whether an acceleration is due to binary motion of the source or the observer: for the case where the acceleration is induced by the source’s binary motion, the source must show (periodic) changes in radial velocity, which can be verified even after the event is over. In Appendix B, we illustrate the expected radial velocities for the simple case of circular binary orbits. We find that the expected radial velocity amplitude is of the order of $`35\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1𝒜^{1/4}\mathrm{sin}i/\mathrm{cos}^{1/4}i`$, where $`i`$ is the inclination angle; there is also some weak dependency on $`t_\mathrm{E}`$, the transverse velocity of the lens, $`v`$, and the masses. The expected orbital period depends on the unknown lens transverse velocity and the inclination angle, but is of the order of $``$ years. This radial velocity can, in principle, be measured.

In the right two panels of Fig. 1, we showed that the light curves are symmetric when the acceleration is perpendicular to the source trajectory. In such cases, the effect of acceleration may be difficult to notice. This may even be true for some cases for which the acceleration is not exactly perpendicular to the source motion, particularly since the real light curves have significant gaps due to bad weather, etc. If we force the standard fit to the microlensing light curve, the time-scale obtained from the fit may be different from the true value. To illustrate the effect, we generate artificial light curves using Monte Carlo simulations. We adopt $`t_\mathrm{E}=30`$ days, and a sampling frequency of one observation per day; the observations lasts from $`2t_\mathrm{E}`$ to $`2t_\mathrm{E}`$ centred around the peak of the light curve. The observational errors are assumed to be 0.05 magnitudes at the baseline and scale according to photon Poisson noise. We find that a standard fit incorporating blending is significantly better than a fit without blending. In other words, a microlensing light curve with constant acceleration can mimic light curves with blending. Interestingly, the fit with blending under-estimates the true $`t_\mathrm{E}`$ by 20% for both acceleration values ($`𝒜=\pm 1.5`$) shown in the right panels of Fig. 1. This can have important implications for the calculation of optical depth. The optical depth, $`\tau `$, is estimated from experiments using the following formula (see, for example, Han & Gould 1995),

$$\tau =\frac{\pi }{2N_{}T_{}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{t_{\mathrm{E}}^{}{}_{,i}{}^{}}{ϵ(t_{\mathrm{E}}^{}{}_{,i}{}^{})},$$
(4)
where $`N_{}`$ is the total number of monitored stars, $`T_{}`$ is the experiment duration in years, $`ϵ(t_{\mathrm{E}}^{}{}_{,i}{}^{})`$ is the detection efficiency, and $`t_{\mathrm{E}}^{}{}_{,i}{}^{}`$ is the Einstein radius crossing time for the $`i`$-th event ($`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$). Obviously, if the time-scale is underestimated then this will lead to an underestimation in the optical depth, and vice versa. However, a quantitative analysis requires a detailed knowledge about the binary parameters of the lens and the source, and sampling frequencies in observations. This is clearly an area that deserves further study.

## Acknowledgments

We thank Simon White for an insightful question which prompted the study and Ian Browne for a careful reading of the paper. We are indebted to the referee Andy Gould for a prompt and comprehensive report. MCS acknowledges receipt of a PPARC grant. This project was supported by the NSF grants AST-9820314, AST-1206213, and the NASA grant NAG5-12212 and funds for proposal #09518 provided by NASA through a grant from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555.

## Appendix A Degeneracies

In this appendix we first describe the degeneracy that is found to arise in the constant-acceleration model. This is followed by a discussion of an equivalent degeneracy in the parallax model, which can occur for short duration events where the Earth’s acceleration may be approximated as constant.

### A.1 Degeneracy in Constant-Acceleration Models

In Section 3 we discuss the degeneracy inherent in fitting microlensing light curves with the constant-acceleration model. It is found that each $`\chi ^2`$ minimum has two corresponding fits, each with differing values of time-scale, $`t_\mathrm{E}`$, and the acceleration parameters, $`𝒜`$ and $`\theta `$. However, the magnitude of the physical acceleration in units of $`r_\mathrm{E}/\mathrm{day}^2`$ (i.e., $`\left|𝐚/r_\mathrm{E}\right|=𝒜/t_\mathrm{E}^2`$) is the same for both fits, although the direction of this vector (i.e., $`\theta `$) differs. In this subsection we show analytically why this degeneracy occurs.

Given a combination of parameters ($`t_\mathrm{E}`$, $`u_0`$, etc), the magnitude of the source displacement in the lens plane (in units of the Einstein radius) at a time $`(t_0+\delta t)`$ can be determined from equations (1-3),

$$u^2(t_0+\delta t)=\left(\widehat{a}\mathrm{cos}\theta \frac{(\delta t)^2}{2}+\frac{\delta t}{t_\mathrm{E}}\right)^2+\left(\widehat{a}\mathrm{sin}\theta \frac{(\delta t)^2}{2}+u_0\right)^2,$$
(5)
where $`\widehat{a}=\left|𝐚/r_\mathrm{E}\right|=𝒜/t_\mathrm{E}^2`$ is the magnitude of the physical acceleration in units of the Einstein radius.

This equation can be expanded to give,

$`u^2(t_0+\delta t)`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{a}^2{\displaystyle \frac{(\delta t)^4}{4}}`$ (6)
$`+`$ $`\left(\widehat{a}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{t_\mathrm{E}}}\right)(\delta t)^3`$
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{t_{\mathrm{E}}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}+u_0\widehat{a}\mathrm{sin}\theta \right)(\delta t)^2`$
$`+`$ $`u_0^2.`$
For two degenerate solutions $`i`$ and $`j`$, the magnitude of the source displacement, $`u_i(t_0+\delta t)`$ and $`u_j(t_0+\delta t)`$, must be the same for all values of $`\delta t`$ (since this is required to produce identical light curves), i.e., $`u_i^2(t_0+\delta t)=u_j^2(t_0+\delta t)`$ for all $`\delta t`$. Since this is true for all values of $`\delta t`$, using equation (6) we can equate powers of $`\delta t`$. This gives the following four equations,

$`\widehat{a}_i`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{a}_j`$ (7)
$`\widehat{a}_i{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta _i}{t_{\mathrm{E}}^{}{}_{,i}{}^{}}}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{a}_j{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta _j}{t_{\mathrm{E}}^{}{}_{,j}{}^{}}}`$ (8)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t_{\mathrm{E}}^{}{}_{,i}{}^{2}}}+u_{0,i}\widehat{a}_i\mathrm{sin}\theta _i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t_{\mathrm{E}}^{}{}_{,j}{}^{2}}}+u_{0,j}\widehat{a}_j\mathrm{sin}\theta _j`$ (9)
$`u_{0,i}^2`$ $`=`$ $`u_{0,j}^2.`$ (10)
From equations (7) and (10) we can see that both $`\widehat{a}`$ and $`u_0`$ must be constant for degenerate solutions (the sign of $`u_0`$ is irrelevant due to the symmetry of the acceleration model; by taking only $`u_0>0`$ one still obtains the full set of solutions). Also, from equations (8) and (9) we find that the quantities $`[\mathrm{cos}\theta /t_\mathrm{E}]`$ and $`[1/(t_\mathrm{E})^2+u_0\widehat{a}\mathrm{sin}\theta ]`$ must also be constant for degenerate solutions. Therefore, the following two equations must hold for every degenerate solution,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{t_\mathrm{E}}}=c_1,`$ (11)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t_\mathrm{E}^2}}+u_0\widehat{a}\mathrm{sin}\theta =c_2,`$ (12)
where $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ are constants defined for any given $`\chi ^2`$ minimum. The parameter $`\theta `$ can then be eliminated from these two equations to give the following expression for $`t_\mathrm{E}`$,

$$f(w)=(\widehat{a}u_0c_1)^2w^3+(c_2^2\widehat{a}^2u_0^2)w^22c_2w+1=0,$$
(13)
where $`wt_\mathrm{E}^2`$. We see that the above equation is a cubic equation in $`w`$. As the coefficients are all real, the number of real solutions is either one or three. Recall that since $`w=t_\mathrm{E}^2`$, physical solutions to equation (13) must clearly correspond to positive values of $`w`$.

As $`f(\mathrm{})=\mathrm{}`$, and $`f(w=0)=1`$, we must have one negative real solution for $`w`$, which is unphysical and should be discarded444 It is possible to have three negative solutions to this equation, although this possibility can be ignored since this would result in no positive (i.e. physical) solutions . It is easy to show that the number of positive (i.e. physical) solutions for $`w`$ must be either zero or two555Although in rare cases, the two positive solutions can be identical. This follows because $`f(w=0)=1`$ and $`f(w=+\mathrm{})=+\mathrm{}`$. If $`f(w)`$ is everywhere positive for $`w>0`$, then the number of positive solutions is obviously zero. If, however, $`f(w)`$ is negative at some point $`w_1(>0)`$, then there must be one positive solution in the region 0 to $`w_1`$, and another positive solution in the region $`w_1`$ to $`+\mathrm{}`$. This therefore immediately implies that if there is one good constant-acceleration fit (i.e. one physical solution for $`w`$), then there must be another degenerate fit with the same $`\chi ^2`$, just as we have found numerically. These two fits have identical values of $`u_0`$ and $`\widehat{a}=𝒜/t_\mathrm{E}^2`$, but different values of $`𝒜`$, $`\theta `$ and $`t_\mathrm{E}`$.

### A.2 A new parallax degeneracy

A consequence of this constant-acceleration degeneracy is that a similar degeneracy should arise for short-duration events that exhibit weak parallax signatures. This is because the acceleration in the parallax model can be approximated as constant provided that the duration of the event is sufficiently short. In the following subsection we consider this new degeneracy and provide an example using the event sc6\_2563, which is introduced in Section 3.2.1.

There are currently well-known degeneracies inherent in parallax microlensing: for example, Gould, Miralda-Escude & Bahcall (1994) discussed the continuous degeneracy that occurs for events with extremely weak parallax signatures where only one component of the relative lens velocity, $`\stackrel{~}{𝐯}`$, is measurable; another four-fold discrete degeneracy was identified in the case of satellite parallax measurements (Refsdal 1966; Gould 1994), although it was shown that this problem can be resolved using higher-order effects (Gould 1995).

As we have discussed above, in the case of the weak candidate parallax events, such as sc6\_2563 (see section 3.2.1), the best constant-acceleration fit mimics the best parallax fit. We also found that each $`\chi ^2`$ minima for the constant-acceleration model possesses two degenerate fits, each with identical values for impact parameter, $`u_0`$ and acceleration magnitude, $`\widehat{a}=𝒜/t_\mathrm{E}^2`$, but different values of $`𝒜`$, $`\theta `$ and $`t_\mathrm{E}`$. However, since the above constant-acceleration formalism is rotationally invariant, it is possible to rotate one of these degenerate constant-acceleration fits so that both degenerate fits have their acceleration vectors co-aligned. Therefore, if one of these best-fit constant-acceleration solutions mimics the existing parallax fit, then the degenerate counterpart (once rotated through the required angle so that the acceleration is also in the same direction as the Earth’s acceleration) should likewise mimic an equivalent parallax fit. Since this new parallax fit must be different from the existing one, this implies that there should be two degenerate parallax fits. Obviously, this argument only holds in the regime of constant-acceleration, i.e., this would not apply to parallax events where the duration is sufficiently long to invalidate the constant-acceleration approximation.

We illustrate this new degeneracy by providing an example using the event sc6\_2563, which was introduced in Section 3.2.1. To identify any degenerate solutions in the parallax parameter space we fit this event 1000 times, taking random values for the initial parameter guesses. From this we identify another solution in the parameter space that has a slightly worse $`\chi ^2`$ value than the previously identified best-fit parallax solution. Both fits are presented in Table 1. If the $`\chi ^2`$ values are renormalised to enforce the $`\chi ^2`$ per degree of freedom to be unity for the best-fit parallax model, then the difference in $`\chi ^2`$ is less than 0.5. Unlike the two degenerate constant-acceleration fits, these parallax fits have different values for the magnitude of the impact parameter, $`u_0`$. However, this is due to the difference in the definition of $`u_0`$ in the two models.

Figure 5 shows the trajectories in the lens plane for the two parallax fits, along with the two degenerate constant-acceleration fits. Note that the $`A^{}`$ trajectory has been rotated so that its acceleration is pointing in the same direction as the $`A`$ trajectory (the rotation does not affect the light curve). Although each parallax trajectory deviates from its corresponding constant-acceleration counterpart, it can be seen that the distance from the origin (i.e., the quantity that determines the magnification; the parameter $`u`$ in eq. 2) is very similar. As expected, this figure shows that the difference between the constant-acceleration and parallax trajectories only becomes apparent away from the point of closest approach, i.e. when the direction of the Earth’s acceleration has changed. This corresponds to the wings of the light curve, but since the magnification is only weak in this region the resulting deviations in the light curve are difficult to detect.

We also investigated the event sc33\_4505, which is introduced in Section 3.2.3. This event exhibits more prominent deviations, and the constant-acceleration model is found to provide a significantly worse fit than the parallax model (see Table 3). Again, we fit this event 1000 times to try and identify any degeneracy that might occur for the parallax model, but we are unable to find any such degenerate fits. The next-best parallax fit has $`\chi ^2=227.9`$, which is more than $`3\sigma `$ away from the best-fit value of $`\chi ^2=217.4`$. Therefore, we conclude that there appears to be no such parallax degeneracy for this event, owing to the fact that the deviations in the light curve are relatively prominent, i.e., these deviations are unable to be reproduced by a constant-acceleration fit.

## Appendix B Radial Velocity

Here we estimate the expected radial velocity for the case where the acceleration is induced by the binary motion of the source. For simplicity, we consider the case where both orbits are circular. Let us denote the mass of the lensed source star as $`M`$ and that of its binary companion as $`M^{}`$, the separation between the stars as $`d`$, and the inclination of the orbital plane as $`i`$ ($`i=90^{}`$ implies an edge-on orbit).

In the centre-of-mass rest frame, the maximum radial velocity is given by

$$v_r=\left(\frac{GM_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{d}\frac{1}{M+M^{}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{sin}i.$$
(14)
The physical acceleration of the lensed source due to its companion is given by $`GM^{}/d^2`$. The component perpendicular to the line-of-sight is $`a=(GM^{}/d^2)(1\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi \mathrm{sin}^2i)^{1/2}`$; here $`\varphi `$ is the angle of the position of the lensed star from the line where the orbital plane and the plane of sky intersect. Notice that our constant acceleration assumption requires that $`\varphi `$ does not change significantly during the lensing event, i.e. for circular orbits $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi <<1`$ implies that the period of the binary $`P>>2\pi t_\mathrm{E}`$. Combining the expression of $`a`$ with the definition of $`𝒜`$, we have

$$𝒜\frac{a}{r_\mathrm{E}/t_\mathrm{E}^2}=\frac{GM^{}}{d^2}\frac{t_\mathrm{E}^2}{r_\mathrm{E}}(1\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi \mathrm{sin}^2i)^{1/2}.$$
(15)
Cancelling out $`d`$ from eqs. (14) and (15), we obtain the maximum radial velocity

$$v_r=\left(\frac{M^{}Gv}{t_\mathrm{E}}\right)^{1/4}𝒜^{1/4}\left(\frac{M^{}}{M+M^{}}\right)^{1/2}\frac{\mathrm{sin}i}{\left(1\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi \mathrm{sin}^2i\right)^{1/8}},$$
(16)
where $`v(=r_\mathrm{E}/t_\mathrm{E})`$ is the lens transverse velocity perpendicular to the observer-source line. Numerically, we have

$$v_r=35\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\left(\frac{M^{}}{M_{}}\frac{100\mathrm{d}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{y}\mathrm{s}}{t_\mathrm{E}}\frac{v}{100\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1}\right)^{1/4}𝒜^{1/4}\left(\frac{M^{}}{M+M^{}}\right)^{1/2}\frac{\mathrm{sin}i}{\left(1\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi \mathrm{sin}^2i\right)^{1/8}}.$$
(17)
Notice that the dependence on the masses, $`𝒜`$ and the lens transverse velocity, $`v`$, are fairly weak.

From Kepler’s third-law, the period of the binary is given by $`P=2\pi d^{3/2}G^{1/2}(M+M^{})^{1/2}`$. Substituting $`d`$ from eq. (15) into $`P`$, we obtain

$$P=221\mathrm{days}\left(\frac{M^{}}{M_{}}\right)^{1/4}\left(\frac{t_\mathrm{E}}{100\mathrm{days}}\frac{100\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1}{v}\right)^{3/4}𝒜^{3/4}\left(\frac{M^{}}{M+M^{}}\right)^{1/2}\left(1\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi \mathrm{sin}^2i\right)^{3/8}.$$
(18)
The dependence of period on the unknown lens transverse velocity and the inclination is fairly sensitive. For events that show constant accelerations, the transverse velocity may be fairly low and hence the period can be of the order of years.


text:
# Study of spectral moments in semileptonic decays of the b hadron with the DELPHI detector at LEP. Presented at ICHEP02, 31^{th} Conference on High Energy Physics Amsterdam, July 2002

## 1 Introduction

Moments of hadronic mass spectrum and of lepton energy spectrum are sensitive to the masses of the $`b`$ and $`c`$ quarks as well as to the non-perturbative parameters of the Heavy Quark Expansion. They allow to improve the determination of the $`|V_{cb}|`$ element of the CKM quark coupling matrix which can be measured from inclusive semileptonic B decays by using the relation:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(bc\mathrm{}\nu )=|V_{cb}|^2f(par.)=BR(bc\mathrm{}\nu )/\tau _b`$

The current experimental accuracy on the semileptonic branching ratio and B lifetime is about 1%, while the evaluation of the function $`f`$, based on Operation Product Expansion, brings an uncertainty of the order of several percent, making it the dominant error contribution.

Moreover, the comparison of these results with different measurements of the same parameters provides a test of the consistency of the theoretical predictions for inclusive semileptonic B decays and of the underlying assumptions.

Previous measurements of spectral moments have been performed at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ , Delphi has performed the first measurement in $`b`$ hadron semileptonic decays at the $`Z^0`$. There are several advantages in the $`Z^0`$ kinematics, mainly the large boost acquired by the b quark ($`E_B30`$ GeV) which gives access in the laboratory frame to the low region of the lepton energy spectrum. The challenge in this case is the complete reconstruction of the B system. The lepton energy acceptance extending down to the lower end of the spectrum makes these results both easier to interpret and complementary to those obtained at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$.

In this study two different formulations, using different mass definitions for deriving the constraints on the OPE parameters, are used.

## 2 Moments of hadronic mass distribution in $`b`$ hadron semileptonic decays

The hadronic mass distribution of $`\overline{\mathrm{B}_\mathrm{d}^0}\mathrm{D}^{}\mathrm{}\overline{\nu }`$ events have been studied . D∗∗ events have been reconstructed in the three channels: D$`{}_{}{}^{0}\pi _{}^{+}`$, D$`{}_{}{}^{+}\pi _{}^{}`$, D$`{}_{}{}^{+}\pi _{}^{}`$ with the D0, D+ and D∗+ mesons fully reconstructed. Leptons have been required to have a momentum greater than 2 GeV/$`c`$ in the laboratory frame. The separation of the signal from the background has been achieved by means of a discriminant variable based on the topological properties of the secondary vertex such as the presence of additional charged particles in addition to the D, the lepton and the neutrino.

D$`\pi `$ candidates have been separated in “right sign” and “wrong sign”, considering the charge correlation between the D and the pion, and the discriminant variable distributions have been fitted to the simulation expectation in the two samples separately. Only D$`{}_{}{}^{()}\pi _{}^{+}\pi ^{}`$ events, with one missing pion, can contribute to “wrong sign” candidates and no evidence of signal have been found in this sample. The following upper limits have been derived at 90% C.L.:

$`BR(b\mathrm{D}^0\pi ^+\pi ^{}\mathrm{}^{}\overline{\nu })=BR(b\mathrm{D}^+\pi ^+\pi ^{}\mathrm{}^{}\overline{\nu })`$

$`<0.18\%`$ and $`BR(b\mathrm{D}^+\pi ^+\pi ^{}\mathrm{}^{}\overline{\nu })<0.17\%`$.

Therefore only D$`\pi `$ states have been considered in the following analysis of the hadronic mass distribution of the D∗∗ states. A fit to the variable $`\mathrm{\Delta }M=m(\mathrm{D}^{()}\pi )m(\mathrm{D}^{()})`$ has been performed, considering the contributions of narrow and broad resonant states D$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{0}{}^{}`$, D$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{1}{}^{}`$, D$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{1}{}^{}`$ and D$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{2}{}^{}`$ as well as non resonant D$`\pi `$ states. An example of $`\mathrm{\Delta }M`$ distribution is shown in Figure 1.

The total rate for D∗∗ production amounts to:

$`\overline{\mathrm{B}_\mathrm{d}^0}\mathrm{D}^{}\mathrm{}\overline{\nu }=(2.6\pm 0.5\pm 0.6)\%`$ and the broad D$`{}_{}{}^{+}{}_{1}{}^{}`$ is the dominant contributing channel.

Moments of the D∗∗ mass distribution have been evaluated from the fitted mass distributions. To determine the moments of the complete hadronic mass distribution, in $`b`$-hadron semileptonic decays, the $`b\mathrm{D}\mathrm{}\overline{\nu }`$ and $`b\mathrm{D}^{}\mathrm{}\overline{\nu }`$ components have been included using the relation $`m_H^n=p_Dm_D^n+p_D^{}m_D^{}^n+p_D^{}m_D^{}^n`$ where $`p_D`$ and $`p_D^{}`$ are the relative branching fractions derived from published results and $`p_D^{}`$ is obtained by imposing the constraint $`p_D+p_D^{}+p_D^{}=1`$ and using the above measurement.

The following preliminary DELPHI results have been obtained:

$`m_H^2m_{\overline{D}}^2=(0.534\pm 0.041\pm 0.074)GeV/c^2`$

$`(m_H^2m_{\overline{D}}^2)^2=(1.51\pm 0.20\pm 0.23)(GeV/c^2)^2`$

$`(m_H^2m_H^2)^2=(1.23\pm 0.16\pm 0.15)(GeV/c^2)^2`$

$`(m_H^2m_H^2)^3=(2.97\pm 0.67\pm 0.48)(GeV/c^2)^3`$

where the first uncertainty is statistic and the second is systematic.

## 3 Moments of lepton energy spectrum in $`b`$ hadron semileptonic decays

The moments of the lepton energy spectrum provide constraints similar to those of the hadronic mass. Further they offer an important consistency test of the theory.

An inclusive reconstruction of the semileptonic decays has been performed . Muons and electrons with a momentum greater than 2.5 and 3.0 GeV/c, respectively, have been tagged in a sample of $`Z^0b\overline{b}`$ events. Secondary vertices have been reconstructed using an iterative procedure. The B energy has been reconstructed adding to the charm vertex energy, the lepton energy and the neutrino energy, evaluated from the event missing energy.

The B direction has been estimated from both the reconstructed B momentum and the B decay flight direction. Boosting the leptons in the B reconstructed rest frame provides a typical energy resolution of 250 MeV. In order to separate signal $`b\mathrm{}`$ events form $`bc\mathrm{}`$ and other backgrounds without introducing significant biases to the lepton energy distribution, two probabilistic variables have been defined based on charge correlation and event topology. The measured energy spectrum after background subtraction is shown in Figure 2. For this preliminary result only 1994 and 1995 statistics have been used, corresponding to a sample of 18,300 leptons. After unfolding the resolution smearing, the first, second and third moments have been calculated. The relevant corrections for distortions due to electromagnetic radiation, contamination of $`bu\mathrm{}\nu `$ decays and contribution of B$`{}_{}{}^{0}{}_{s}{}^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ hadrons in the events sample have been applied. The following preliminary DELPHI results have been obtained:

$`E_{\mathrm{}}^{}=(1.383\pm 0.012\pm 0.008)GeV`$

$`(E_{\mathrm{}}^{}E_{\mathrm{}}^{})^2=(0.192\pm 0.005\pm 0.010)GeV^2`$

$`(E_{\mathrm{}}^{}E_{\mathrm{}}^{})^3=(0.029\pm 0.005\pm 0.005)GeV^3`$

where the first uncertainty is statistic and the second is systematic.

## 4 Interpretation of the results

Two different approaches have been followed in order to obtain constraints on the non-perturbative parameters of OPE from the measured spectral moments. The first  is based on an expansion on the pole masses $`m_b`$ and $`m_c`$ and expresses the $`b`$-energy parameter as $`\lambda _1`$, while the second  uses running heavy quark masses $`m_b(\mu )`$ and $`m_c(\mu )`$ and the kinetic energy expectation value $`\mu _\pi ^2`$, corresponding to $`\lambda _1`$.

Results obtained from the measured values of the first two moments of the hadronic mass spectrum and lepton energy spectrum have been found to be compatible. An exemplification is given in Figure 3 showing constraints extracted in the $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ \- $`\lambda _1`$ plane which give:

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=(0.44\pm 0.04\pm 0.05\pm 0.07)GeV`$

$`\lambda _1=(0.23\pm 0.04\pm 0.05\pm 0.08)GeV^2`$

where the quoted uncertainties are statistic, systematic and related to the power corrections and $`\alpha _s`$ uncertainties, respectively.

Another way to express these results exploits the correlation in the expected values for the charm and beauty quark masses to extract the charm quark mass $`m_c`$ by using an independently determined value of $`m_b`$. Using the first two moments of the lepton energy spectrum and $`m_b`$=(4.60$`\pm `$0.05 ) GeV, with the second theoretical formulation we find:

$$m_c(1\mathrm{GeV})=(1.19\pm 0.05\pm 0.05\pm 0.07\pm 0.04)GeV$$

where the quoted uncertainties are statistic, systematic $`\pm `$ 0.050 GeV on $`m_b`$ and $`1/m_b^3`$ corrections, respectively.

## 5 Acknowledgment

I would like to thank M.Battaglia and P.Roudeau for their contributions to this work, N.Uraltsev and P.Gambino for contributing to the theoretical predictions used in this paper.