text:
# Magnetic and Electric Fields around the Black Hole in Cyg X-1

## 1 Introduction

Cygnus X-1 is a X-ray binary star system consisting of a compact object of at least 8 solar masses and of an O9.7 Iab supergiant with the effective temperature $`T_e=30000`$K and luminosity $`L10^{38}ergs^1`$. This magnitude is approximately ten times higher than the X-ray luminosity of the compact object. X-ray and optical fluxes of this system are varied with the orbital period $`P_{orb}=5^d.6`$. The light curve determines the mass function that appears quite low $`f(M)=0.25M_{}`$. Nevertheless, taking into account the value of the inclination angle and the typical magnitude of OB-supergiant mass one can estimate the compact object mass not less than $`8M_{}`$. It means that the X-ray compact object in the Cyg X-1 system is the black hole (see the last review by Cherepaschuk, 2001).

The observed X-ray spectrum of Cygnus X-1 is well described as a radiation from a geometrically thin plasma accretion disk around the black hole. The theory of such disks is now well developed, the basic classical work having made by Shakura and Sunayev (1973). The disk model reproduces quite well as the soft so hard spectral components in high or low states of a disk. The main difficulty of the modern models is to explain the unusual transitions between these states.

There is an exciting problem of existence of magnetic field in the nearest environment of a black hole. This problem appears tightly connecting with another key problem how to extract energy from a rotating black hole. Many authors have considered various alternative mechanisms for extracting energy from a rotating black hole. Among them the most promising one is the well-known Blandford-Znajek mechanism (Blandford and Znajek, 1977). In this mechanism a Kerr black hole is assumed to connect with surrounding matter with magnetic field lines. The magnetic field lines thread the black hole’s horizon and its rotation twists the magnetic field lines and transports energy and angular momentum from the black hole to the accretion disk (Blandford, 2001; Li, 2002; Li and Paczynski, 2000 and references therein).

A magnetic field connecting a black hole to a disk has important effects on the balance and transfer of energy and angular momentum. The global structure of black hole magnetosphere involving axisymmetric magnetic field and plasma injected from an accretion disk has been extensively investigated for explaining various observational features of transient X-ray binaries and AGNs (see,e.g., for review by Beskin, 1997). Recently Robertson and Leiter (2002) claimed an evidence for intrinsic magnetic moments in galactic black hole candidates.

Another new idea was presented recently by Ruffini et al.(2001, 2002) and Punsly (2001). It has been suggested that the observed features of gamma-ray bursters can be modelled by the presence of an electrically charged black hole. Preparata et al. (1998 and 2002) present a model of GRB 971214. They claimed that basic energy requirements of GRB sources can be easily accounted for by a pair creation process occurring in, so-called, the ”Dyadosphere” that can be considered as the ergosphere of a charged black hole. The ”Dyadosphere” is defined by Preparata et al.(2002) as the region outside the horizon of an electromagnetic black hole (EMBH) where electromagnetic field exceeds the critical value for $`e^+e^{}`$ pair production.

The energy of a fast rotating BH can be transferred into energy of strong relativistic jets. Namely this process was considered by Blandford and Znajek (1977). They estimated the energy value being extracted from a fast rotating BH due to a magnetic field strength $`B`$:

$$L_x6\times 10^{38}a\left(\frac{M_{BH}}{M_{}}\right)^2\left(\frac{B}{10^8G}\right)ergs^1$$
(1)
where $`a=\frac{l}{M}`$ is the specific angular momentum of a black hole.

However the strong evidence of existence of the global magnetic field in the nearest environment of BH in the close binary systems was obtained from the direct polarimetric observations. Michalsky et al.(1975) have presented an evidence of variable circular polarization of the binary system Cyg X-1/HDE 226868, that was varied with the period of the binary system $`P_{orb}=5^d.6`$. They claimed the magnetic origin of this polarization. Below we shall consider all combined observed data that give possibility to determine the magnetic field strength near the black hole in the Cyg X-1/HDE 226868 binary system. The results of spectropolarimetric observations in the spectral line HeII $`\lambda 4686`$ made with BTA-6m telescope will be also presented. These data allow to derive the radial distribution of magnetic field in the accretion disk. If the characteristic size of the magnetic field region coincides with the Dyadosphere radius one can determine the value $`Q`$ of charge of black hole in the Cyg X-1/HDE 226868 binary system.

## 2 Polarimetric Observations of Cyg X-1 and Determination of the Magnetic Field Strength near the Black Hole

The first determination the magnetic field strength near the compact object in the Cyg X-1/HDE 226868 binary system have been made in a result of observing circular optical polarization of this system (Kemp et al., 1972, Michalsky et al., 1975, 1977). The magnitude of the circular polarization have been estimated at the level of $`P_V=(4.8\pm 0.5)\times 10^4`$. The detail analysis shows that this polarization can not be of interstellar origin, i.e., can’t be generated, for instance, in a result of conversion of the intrinsic linear polarization of this system into the circular one onto the oriented interstellar dust grains (see, for example, Dolginov et al., 1995), because this mechanism requires too high value compare to observational intrinsic linear polarization of this system. It requires the magnitude of the intrinsic linear polarization, at least, at the level $`P_l2\%`$ that contradicts to observations. The real polarimetric observations give the magnitude of intrinsic linear polarization at the level only $`P_l0.2\%`$. Therefore seems naturally the explanation of observed circular polarization as a magnetic origin. This polarization can appear in a result of scattering of a light by electrons in surrounding plasma (see, for example, Dolginov et al., 1995, Gnedin and Silant’ev, 1997). The magnitude of magnetic field is readily estimated by

$$P_V\frac{\omega _B}{\omega }6\times 10^2\left(\frac{B}{10^8G}\right)\left(\frac{\lambda }{4500\text{Å}}\right)$$
(2)
where $`\omega _B=\frac{eB}{m_ec}`$ is the cyclotron frequency, and $`\omega `$ is the radiation frequency. The magnetic field strength $`B10^6`$G corresponds namely to the observed value $`P_V5\times 10^4`$ circular polarization. It is evident that the magnetic field of such magnitude cannot exist at the surface of the supergiant HDE 226868. Therefore one can make the conclusion that an accretion disk namely is the origin of the magnetic field of such magnitude.

One ought to consider the value $`B10^6`$G as only the lower limit of the real magnetic field value in the accretion disk because of the dilution effect by the stellar optical light of HDE 226868 itself. Usually one estimates the accretion disk optical luminosity at the level of $`1\%`$ of the total optical luminosity of the binary system Cyg X-1/HDE 226868. It means that the real strength of magnetic field is of order of $`B10^7÷10^8`$G.

The next important stage of searching magnetic field in the system Cyg X-1/HDE 226868 is connected with the first polarimetric observations of this system in X-ray spectral range. The X-ray polarimetric observations have been made by Long et al.(1980) with the Bragg crystal polarimeter aboard OSO8. The marginal detection of the time-averaged polarization was given for Cyg X-1 at the level: $`P_l(2.6KeV)=2.4\%\pm 1.1\%`$ and $`P_l(5.2KeV)=5.3\%\pm 2.5\%`$. Unfortunately, the observational results occurred at the low confidence level, only $`2\sigma `$. Nevertheless, if one suggest that the decrease of net polarization for the energy $`E=2.6KeV`$ due to the effect of Faraday depolarization (see Gnedin and Silant’ev, 1980, 1984, 1997, and Dolginov et al., 1995) it is possible to derive the magnetic field strength in the nearest environment of the black hole where X-ray radiation is generated.

The angle of Faraday rotation $`\chi `$ is determined by the expression (Gnedin and Silant’ev, 1980):

$$\chi =\frac{1}{2}\delta \tau _T\mathrm{cos}\theta ;\delta =\frac{3\omega _Bc}{2r_e\omega ^2}1.2\left(\frac{B}{10^6G}\right)\left(\frac{1KeV}{\mathrm{}\omega }\right)^2$$
(3)
where $`\tau _T`$ is the optical thickness of the region of electron scattering, $`\theta `$ is the angle between directions of magnetic field $`\stackrel{}{B}`$ and radiation propagation $`\stackrel{}{n}`$, $`r_e=\frac{e^2}{m_ec^2}`$ is the classical electron radius.

If the magnetic field is increased the angle $`\chi `$ increases too and partly polarized scattered radiation begins to undergo Faraday rotation. The rotation angles $`\chi `$ are different for photons scattered in different volumes alone the line of sight $`\stackrel{}{n}`$, and in a result the total radiation from all volume elements will be depolarized (see Fig.10 from the review by Gnedin and Silant’ev, 1997).

The spectra of polarized radiation scattered in a spherically symmetric magnetized envelope, and also in optically thick scattering disk have been calculated by Dolginov et al., 1995, Gnedin and Silant’ev, 1997, Silant’ev, 2001.

For an accretion disk the Stokes parameters have been derived by Silant’ev, 2001:

$`Q(\stackrel{}{n},\stackrel{}{B})={\displaystyle \frac{F}{2\pi J_1}}{\displaystyle \frac{1g}{1+g}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1\mu ^2)(1k\mu )}{(1k\mu )^2+(1q)^2\delta ^2\mathrm{cos}\theta ^2}}`$
$`U(\stackrel{}{n},\stackrel{}{B})={\displaystyle \frac{F}{2\pi J_1}}{\displaystyle \frac{1g}{1+g}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1\mu ^2)(1q)\delta \mathrm{cos}\theta }{(1k\mu )^2+(1q)^2\delta ^2\mathrm{cos}\theta ^2}}`$ (4)
Here $`\stackrel{}{n}`$ is the line of sight direction, $`\theta `$ is the angle between the line of sight and the magnetic field $`\stackrel{}{B}`$, $`\mu =\mathrm{cos}\vartheta `$, where $`\vartheta `$ is the angle between the line of sight and the normal to the surface of the accretion disk, $`q=\frac{\sigma _a}{\sigma _T}`$ is the ratio between the cross-sections of absorption and electron scattering. The values of constants $`J`$, $`g`$ and $`K`$ are tabulated by Silant’ev, 2001. He also published there the dependencies of polarization of an accretion disk radiation on various magnitudes of $`\mu `$, $`q`$ and $`\delta `$.

From Eq.(4) it is evident that with increase of the depolarization parameter $`\delta `$ and the magnetic field strength $`B`$ respectively, the polarization drops as $`P_l\frac{1}{\delta }\frac{1}{\lambda ^2B}`$ where $`\lambda `$ is the radiation wavelength. For the quite large values of $`\delta 1`$ the angular dependence of net polarization on the angle $`\theta `$ has narrow maximum into the angular interval $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta \frac{1}{(1q)\delta }`$.

Using the polarimetric observations in X-ray spectral range one can estimate the magnetic field strength near the black hole itself, if one suggests that the decrease of polarization at the energy $`E=2.6KeV`$ is due to the depolarization effect. Then the requirements of $`\delta (E=2.6KeV)1`$ allows to get the following estimation of the magnetic field strength in the nearest environment around the black hole in Cyg X-1 system: $`B3\times 10^7G`$.

Independent estimation of a magnetic field of optical radiation region around the Cyg X-1 black hole can be too made via the measured intrinsic linear polarization of Cyg X-1/HDE 226868. This polarization has been discovered by Nolt et al. (1975). The amplitude of the variable polarization occurred quite low at the level of $`0.2\%`$, with the very complex pattern of variability. Nolt et al (1975) claimed the discovery of various types of polarization variability with $`39^d`$ and $`78^d`$ periods and of long-term variability. The possible mechanisms of this variability have been in detail discussed by Karitskaya, 1979, 1981 and by Bochkarev et al., 1979. Unfortunately, the real explanation of observed linear polarization of Cyg X-1 is absent up to date.

If one accepts the accretion matter around the black hole as a real source of the observed optical polarization it is necessary to increase the intrinsic optical polarization of the black hole environment at least in $`100`$ times, because of the high dilution of polarized radiation by the optical light of the supergiant HDE 226868. Its luminosity is estimated at the level of $`L_0(1÷3)\times 10^{39}erg/s`$. Let us remind the X-ray luminosity of Cyg X-1 is estimated as $`L_X8\times 10^{37}erg/s`$ (see, for example, Cherepaschuk, 2001). We consider the case when the optical radiation is generated near the black hole as a result of reprocessing of X-ray by nearest accretion matter. It means that the real magnitude of net linear polarization from the nearest accreted mater can reach magnitude at the level $`P_l10\%`$. Such high value polarization can be dare say produced in a result of single scattering in outflows such as a magnetized wind or dynamical corona.

One can estimate the resulting polarization by using calculations of polarization of radiation from a central light source (a star) surrounded by a thin magnetized shell made by Dolginov et al, 1995, (see the paragraph 9 of section 4 of their book). In a rough model of magnetized spherically symmetric electron shell surrounding the accretion disk of the central black hole the net polarization can reach magnitude $`P_l10\%`$ for $`\delta \tau _{Sh}10`$ where $`\tau _{Sh}`$ is the optical thickness of a shell respect to electron scattering. In true it is valid only for the case when the line of sight is perpendicular to the magnetic field direction. If one suggests that $`\tau _{Sh}0.1`$, then the magnetic field strength in optical region of the disk can be easily estimated from the expression

$$\delta =0.8\left(\frac{B}{1G}\right)\left(\frac{\lambda }{1mM}\right)^2$$
(5)
The Eq.(5) allows to estimate the magnetic field strength in the region of optical radiation generation as $`B500G`$. A number of models of accretion disk gives the value of the corona inner radius as $`100R_g`$, where $`R_g=\frac{2GM_{BH}}{c^2}`$ is the gravitational radius. For dipolar magnetic field the estimation of the magnetic field strength in nearest environment of the black hole gives $`B(3R_g)10^7G`$ that is close to previous estimations.

## 3 Estimation of a Charge of the Black Hole in Cyg X-1/HDE 226868 Binary System

Accreting black holes can release enormous amounts of energy to their surroundings in quite different forms. The idea of a black hole endowed with electromagnetic structure (EMBH) has recently become very popular. Still in 1971 Ruffini and Wheeler proposed the famous ”uniqueness theorem” stating that black holes can only be characterized by their mass-energy $`E`$, charge $`Q`$ and angular moment $`l`$. This idea has been recently developed by Ruffini (2002), Ruffini and Vitagliano (2002) (see refs therein). Various models of particle accelerations near black holes have been widely discussed at last time in connection with the studies of synchrotron radiation and inverse Compton scattering from jets observed over a wide spectral range, from radio to gamma rays. Preparata et al.(2002) formulated the derivation of, so-called, ”Dyadosphere” that was defined as the region outside the horizon of an EMBH where the electromagnetic field exceeds the critical value for $`e^+e^{}`$ pair production. They expressed the outer radius of dyadosphere in the form:

$$R_{ds}=\left(\frac{\mathrm{}}{m_ec}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(\frac{GM}{c^2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(\frac{m_p}{m_e}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(\frac{e}{q_p}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(\frac{Q}{\sqrt{G}M}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}1.12\times 10^8\sqrt{\mu \xi }cm$$
(6)
where $`m_p=(\mathrm{}c/G)^{0.5}`$ is the Planck mass and $`q_p=(\mathrm{}c)^{0.5}`$ is the Planck charge, $`\mu =\frac{M}{M_{}}`$, $`\xi =\frac{Q}{Q_{max}}`$

Another model of EMBH has been recently developed by Shatsky (2001, 2003, Shatsky and Kardashev, 2002). He suggested a mechanism that combines a unipolar inductor and strong gravitational black hole effects. In the result he showed that the black hole electric charge can be expressed in terms of the magnetic field at the disk center $`B_0`$ as follows:

$$Q=\frac{\pi }{2}\mathrm{\Omega }R^2aB_0$$
(7)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the Keplerian rotation frequency, $`R`$ is the disk radius and $`a`$ is the distance from the center where located two charges $`\pm Q`$. In this model the electric field of the disk element can be presented as the field from two charges $`\pm Q`$, located inside the disk.

For estimation of a charge magnitude of the Cyg X-1 black hole we use the value of a intrinsic magnetic moment of this black hole that has been recently estimated by Robertson and Leiter (2002). They tested the hypothesis that the power law part of the quiescent emissions of the black hole candidates might be magnetospheric origin. They derived proposed magnetic moments and rates of spin for them and predicted their quiescent luminosities. For Cyg X-1 the estimated magnitude of the intrinsic magnetic moment appeared $`m=1.26\times 10^{30}Gcm^3`$. Let us suggest that the characteristic scale dimension of magnetic field generation and the dyadosphere radius coincide one to other. Then, using the estimated by Robertson and Leiter value of the intrinsic magnetic moment of the black hole in Cyg X-1 and obtained from polarimetric observations the magnetic field strength $`B3\times 10^7G`$ one may obtain the value of the Cyg X-1 dyadosphere radius directly from polarimetric observations:

$$R_{ds}(CygX1)=3.5\times 10^7cm$$
(8)
Comparing Eqs. (6) and (7) one can estimate the electric charge magnitude of the black hole in Cyg X-1:

$$Q=7.8\times 10^3\left(\frac{10M_{}}{M_{BH}}\right)Q_{max}$$
(9)
Quite similar estimation can be obtained if one proposes the electron-position jet region radius in the Cyg X-1 nonthermal corona as the magnetic field region radius. Maccarone and Coppi (2002) estimate this radius as $`R_{car}10^8cm`$. Then the magnitude of a probable electric charge for the Cyg X-1 black hole appears as

$$Q0.08\left(\frac{10M_{}}{M_{BH}}\right)Q_{max}$$
(10)
Now we can estimate the rotation rate of the black hole in Cyg X-1 with use of Shatsky model (see Eq.(7)). Accepting the distance $`ah(0.1÷1)3R_g`$, where $`h`$ is the height of the accretion disk, one can estimate the rotation rate $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of the black hole that is producing the charge $`Q0.08Q_{max}`$:

$$\mathrm{\Omega }\frac{2Q}{\pi aR^2B_0}20\left(\frac{Q}{0.1}\right)\left(\frac{3\times 10^7G}{B_0}\right)$$
(11)
It means that rotation period of the Cyg X-1 black hole $`P0^s.03÷0^s.3`$ depending on our estimation of the charge magnitude (see Eqs. (9), (10)).

## 4 The Radial Structure of Magnetic Field in the Accretion Disk

The spectral and spectropolarimetric observations of the Cyg X-1/HDE 226868 were made by BTA-6m telescope at 2001 July, with UAGS spectrograph and CCD analyzer of circular and linear polarization. The diffraction slit with a dispersion $`1300mm^1`$ have been used. This slit provides the spectral resolution $`1.5\text{Å}/pixel`$ in the $`35009000\text{Å}`$ range. During observations the seeing was not higher $`1\mathrm{"}.5`$. The reprocessing was made with the standard MIDAS program. The results of observations are presented at Fig.1. The spectropolarimetric observations have been carried out near the spectral line of $`HeII\lambda 4686`$, that is usually proposed to be generated in an accretion disk. The upper limit of the circular polarization net in $`HeII\lambda 4686`$ line appears as $`P_v<0.2\%`$. One can estimate the constraints of a magnetic field strength in the region of $`HeII`$ lines generation: $`B(R_{HeII})<10^3G`$.

The $`HeII\lambda 4686`$ line is produced in the region of the high temperature $`T_e(R_{HeII})10^5K`$. The standard theory of an accretion disk (Shakura and Sunayev, 1973) determines the following radial temperature distribution:

$$T_e(R)=T_{in}\left(\frac{R_{in}}{R}\right)^{3/4}$$
(12)
where $`R_{in}`$ and $`T_{in}`$ are the radius and temperature at the disk inner radius, respectively.

Suggesting that the inner radius corresponds to the marginal orbit radius $`R_{in}=3R_g=6GM/c^2`$ and $`kT_e1KeV`$, i.e. corresponds to X-ray temperature one can readily derive the helium ionization radius

$$R_{HeII}=R_{in}\left(\frac{T_{in}}{T_{HeII}}\right)^{4/3}$$
(13)
For the Cyg X-1 black hole with the mass magnitude $`M_{BH}=10M_{}`$ we have $`R_{HeII}=1.4\times 10^3R_g`$. If one now suggests the power low of magnetic field radial distribution

$$B=B_0\left(\frac{R}{3R_g}\right)^\delta $$
(14)
where $`B_0=B(3R_g)`$, it is easy to determine the value $`\delta `$ of a power law index. Choosing the values of magnetic field strengths as $`B_0=10^8G`$ and $`B(R_{HeII})10^2G`$, one can derive the value $`\delta 2`$. This is the first experimental determination of the index of a magnetic field radial dependence in accretion disks.

## 5 Conclusions

Polarimetric observational data of X-ray binary Cyg X-1/HDE 226868 allows to estimate the magnetic field strength near the last marginal orbit of a black hole as $`B_010^8G`$. If one suggests that the characteristic scale size of the magnetic field region is the same as a dyadosphere radius (Preparata et al., 2002; Ruffini et al., 2003) one can estimate the charge value of the Cyg X-1 black hole. It occurs at the level $`1\%`$ of its maximal magnitude $`M\sqrt{G}`$. At the basis of BTA-6m spectropolarimetric data of Cyg X-1 the radial distribution of the magnetic field in the accretion disk was estimated. The power law index appeared $`\delta 2`$.

We are grateful to D.I. Makarov (SAO RAN) for the help in obtaining of observational material.

This work was supported by the Russian Programs GNTP ”Astronomy” and by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (Project 3-02-17223-a).


format: text

text:
# Pseudogap and Central Peak in the Emery Model

## 1 Introduction

To understand conducting electrons in high-Tc superconductors, one can try and separate the experimental situation into as many individually understandable pieces as possible. Simple calculations are then used to read experiment, rather than predict it, and so constrain the eventual complete theory. In this spirit, our main result here is that the narrow non-dispersive feature found in ARPES measurements in BSCCO along the $`(\pi ,0)`$$`(\pi ,\pi )`$ (X–M) direction is antiadiabatic: the responsible fermionic excitation is much slower than the dominant perturbing boson, which imparts it with a $`(\pi ,\pi )`$ momentum transfer.

This interpretation is obtained in the context of two other insights. First, the observed Fermi surface shapes in LSCO, YBCO and BSCCO are most efficiently fitted in a three band model, taking the oxygen degree of freedom explicitly into account . This reduces the number of parameters needed from six (in a one-band model) to only three. Second, while the extended high ARPES background is not obtained here, we note it can be obtained by an explicit treatment of the on-site repulsion by slave-bosons with fluctuations, both in ARPES  and Raman spectra .

In this paper, we concentrate on the next piece of the puzzle. In BSCCO, the above-mentioned Fermi surface fit is not accompanied by a similarly successful fit of the dispersion. The experimental dispersion is very flat in the X–M direction, while the zeroth-order dispersion of the Cu-O resonant band, fitted to the Fermi surface, has a strong anisotropy at the X (vH) point. We show that the discrepancy is resolved by the intervention of a narrow antiadiabatic quasiparticle near the Fermi energy. The leading edge scale of the wide adiabatic wing beneath it can be obtained at the same time.

## 2 Antiadiabatic regime

We calculate the one-loop contribution to the electron self-energy, extending a previous calculation  to a realistic dispersion, and electrons at arbitrary wave-vectors. The dispersion accounts for the strong on-site repulsion through a mean-field renormalization of overlaps, so the parameter regime is $`t<|t^{}|<<\mathrm{\Delta }_{pf}`$, the *effective* Cu-O hopping, O-O hopping, and Cu-O energy splitting, respectively. The main feature of this work is that the perturbing paramagnon is *faster* than the electron around the vH point. Such an antiadiabatic regime always exists, because the electron velocity is zero there, but in our case, the large quasiparticle effective mass and short correlation length of paramagnons act in concert to extend the antiadiabatic quasiparticle to about 30% of the zone in the X–M direction. This requires a low, but not too low ‘bandhead’ of the paramagnons, we take 10 meV, appropriate for the superconducting state .

The corresponding intensities are shown in Fig. 1. The net effect on the dispersion around Ef is as if one had cut out the rising part and replaced it horizontally. The lower wing turns upwards, following the unperturbed dispersion, but shifted by a pseudogap. The possible impact of the side wings on high Tc has recently been extensively analysed . The antiadiabatic (horizontal) part has a maximum where it crosses the trace of the old dispersion. The valley separating the two peaks is due to the absence of explicit slave boson dynamics in the calculation .

Figure 2 shows the experimental intensities in the X–M direction . We observe that the lower wing turns upward, and that the non-dispersive feature has a maximum where the lower wing ‘points’ at it. This unexpected correspondence of qualitative details with our calculation increases our confidence in the basic interpretation of the non-dispersive feature.

## 3 Discussion

The antiadiabatic quasiparticle is a very robust phenomenon, once the paramagnon anomaly increases at a sufficient rate out of its minimum at $`(\pi ,\pi )`$, relative to the electron dispersion’s increase away from the vH point. This opens a ‘window’ in the BZ, where the fermions are slower than the bosons, so there is no adiabatic suppression of the quasiparticle strength. Then the relative strength of the central peak, and the energy scale at which the wings appear, may be adjusted through the paramagnon bandhead and coupling strength, respectively, without much fine-tuning.

As one moves away from the vH point in the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ direction, the non-dispersive feature ’melts’ with the lower wing into a single dispersion, both in our calculation and in experiment. However, while this is complete by $`(0.9\pi /a,0)`$ in the calculation, the non-dispersive feature is observed up to $`(0.6\pi /a,0)`$ , as also found in cuts along the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$–M line . We hope that a self-consistent calculation, allowing for charge and spin channels on equal footing, might resolve this issue.