Puzzles in Astrophysics in the Past and Present* V
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Physics of Atomic Nuclei, Vol. 66, No. 3, 2003, pp. 423–434. From Yadernaya Fizika, Vol. 66, No. 3, 2003, pp. 451–462. Original English Text Copyright c 2003 by Berezinsky. NEW PHYSICS BEYOND THE STANDARD MODEL Puzzles in Astrophysics in the Past and Present* V. S. Berezinsky 1) Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso, Assergi, Italy Received February 13, 2002 Abstract—About 400 years have passed since the great discoveries by Galileo, Kepler, and Newton, but astronomy still remains an important source of discoveries in physics. They start with puzzles, with phenomena difficult to explain, and phenomena which in fact need new physics for explanation. Do such puzzles exist now? There are at least three candidates: absence of absorption of TeV gamma radiation in extragalactic space (violation of Lorentz invariance?), absence of GZK cutoff in the spectrumof ultrahigh- energy cosmic rays (new particle physics?), tremendous energy (up to 1054 erg) released in gamma ray bursts on a time scale of a second (collapsing stars or sources of a new type?). Do these puzzles really exist? A critical review of these phenomena is given. c 2003 MAIK “Nauka/Interperiodica”. 1. INTRODUCTION with calculations. But skepticism of the community, especially in the case of the solar neutrino problem, Not many good things fall down on us from the was strong. Pushed mostly by Davis and Bahcall, sky, but discoveries do. Below, I will give a short list the solar neutrino problemmovedlike a slow coach of astrophysical discoveries of the last four decades, along a road two decades long. Fortunately, physics separating intuitively astrophysics fromcosmology. differs from democracy: the opinion of the majority Quasars were discovered in the early 1960s as means usually less than that of one. These two ob- compact radio sources. In 1960, Mathews and San- scure puzzles have turned (or have almost turned) dage identified radio source 3C48 with a stellar- into discovery of the most fascinating phenomenon, like object. In 1963, Schmidt deciphered the optical neutrino oscillations. spectrumof quasar 3C273 assuming its redshift, Supernova SN 1987a became an elementary- z =0.158. Surmounting resistance of skeptics, this particle laboratory in the sky for the study of prop- explanation moved the source to the distance of erties of neutrinos, axions, majorons, etc. Detection 630 Mpc and made its luminosity uncomfortably of neutrinos [1] became a triumph of the theory: the ∼ 46 number of detected neutrinos, duration of the neutrino large, L 10 erg/s. This puzzling energy release pulse, and estimated neutrino luminosity turned resulted in the long run in the discovery of a black out to be in agreement with theoretical prediction. hole, an object of general relativity. Gravitational collapse as a phenomenon providing the Pulsars were discovered first in 1967 by a student SN explosion was confirmed. of A. Hewish, Jocelyn Bell. She observed a puzzling However, some puzzles remain. The presupernova periodicity of radiopulses froman unknown source. is a blue supergiant, not a red one as the theory of stel- After a short but intense discussion of different pos- lar evolution prescribes. But what is more puzzling sible sources, including extraterrestrial civilizations is rotation. The asymmetric ring around SN 1987a and little green men, magnetized rotating neutron implies that the presupernova was a rotating star (it stars, pulsars, were found to be responsible. It opened would be a surprise if not!). But the striking agree- anewfield of cosmic physics: relativistic electrody- ment of neutrino observations with calculations was namics. obtained for a nonrotating presupernova. Inclusion of rotation in calculations is a very difficult task. The The atmospheric neutrino anomaly and the solar simplified calculations [2] demonstrate that rotation neutrino problemwent along the mostdi fficult road changes the predictions dramatically: the tempera- to the status of discovery. The puzzling phenomenon ture of the neutrinosphere decreases by a factor of 2, in both cases was a neutrino deficit as compared the total energy of the emitted neutrinos becomes six ∗This article was submitted by the author in English. times smaller, and the number of detected neutrinos 1)and Institute for Nuclear Research, Russian Academy of should be an order of magnitude smaller. Sciences, pr. Shestidesyatiletiya Oktyabrya 7a, Moscow False discoveries often have a greater impact on 117312 Russia; E-mail: [email protected] physics than true ones. 1063-7788/03/6603-0423$24.00 c 2003 MAIK “Nauka/Interperiodica” 424 BEREZINSKY At the end of the 1960s and the beginning of the the problem: Is there an aesthetically attractive theory 1970s, it was found by using long-baseline inter- with broken LI? ferometry that in some cases gas clouds in quasars Breaking of LI, even extremely weak, leads to ex- and radiogalaxies had velocities exceeding the speed istence of the absolute Lorentz frame. This is a qual- of light by a factor of 4–10. In fact, the measured itative difference between the two theories. Absence velocity was a projection of the velocity on the plane of continuous transition fromone theory to another perpendicular to the line of view. Accurately written in looks disturbing. Lorentz invariance is a basic princi- relativistic mechanics, this (apparent) velocity is ple for building a Lagrangian for any interaction. How v −1 is it possible to abandon it? v = v sin θ 1 − cos θ . (1) app c All questions raised above disappear in spon- taneously broken LI. Equations of motion remain Provided by the ultrarelativistic velocity of an object Lorentz-invariant. The violation occurs spontaneous- v ∼ c, the apparent velocity can exceed the speed ly in the solutions. Lagrangians for all interactions of light. Astrophysics of relativistic objects, now a are constructed as Lorentz scalars and spontaneous subject of university courses, was born. LI breaking occurs due to nonzero values of field The Cyg X-3 saga is a story of a different kind. components in vacuum states. Breaking of LI can Cyg X-3 is a galactic binary systemwell studied be made arbitrarily small, and all physical effects in all types of radiations, most notably in x rays. In accompanied by LI breaking are small too. The the 1980s, many EAS (extensive air showers) arrays absolute Lorentz frame exists, but all physical effects, detected a periodic 4.8-h gamma-ray signal from it which distinguish it from other frames, are small, and ≥ in the VHE (very high energy, E 1 TeV) and UHE thus all frames are nearly equivalent, similar to the ≥ (ultrahigh energy, E 0.1–1 PeV) ranges. The list of Lorentz-invariant theory. these arrays included Kiel, Haverah Park, Fly’s Eye, Akeno, Carpet-Baksan, Tien Shan, Platey Rosa, Durham, Ooty, Ohya, Gulmarg, Crimea, Dugway, 2.1. Spontaneously Broken Lorentz Invariance Whipple, and others. Probably, it is easy to say that there was no single EAS array which claimed no- Lorentz invariance is spontaneously broken when signal observation. Additionally, some underground thetimecomponentofthevectorortensorfield ob- detectors (Nusex, Soudan, MUTRON) marginally tains a nonzero value. The necessary condition for the observed a high-energy muon signal from the direc- phase transition to such a configuration is existence tion of this source. Apart fromthe Kiel array, which of a potential minimum at this value. Such a condition claimed a 6σ signal, the confidence level of detection can be fulfilled only in some exceptional cases, e.g., in was not high (3–4σ). In 1990–1991, two new- superstring theories [3] and in some specificD-brane generation detectors, CASA-MIA and SYGNUS, models with extra dimensions [4, 5]. The interactions put a stringent upper limit to the signal from Cyg X-3, responsible for such a potential minimum usually do which excluded early observations. not appear in conventional four-dimensional renor- malizable theories. Apart fromtwo lessons —(i) good detectors are better than bad ones and (ii) 3σ discoveries should Consider for example the Lorentz-invariant inter- not be trusted even if many detectors confirmthem — action of a superheavy tensor field Tµν... with an ordi- experience of Cyg X-3 has taught us how to evaluate nary field described by spinor ψ. If, for example, string statistical significance in searching for periodic sig- interactions set nonzero vev for the time components nals. of this tensor field, the interaction termconsidered is The false discovery of high-energy radiation from reduced to a termthat explicitly breaks LI [6]: Cyg X-3 had a great impact on theoretical high- L = v ψ¯Γ(i∂ )kψ, (2) energy astrophysics, stimulating study of accelera- int M k k 0 tion in binary systems, production of high-energy where vk = T00... is vev, Γ is build from γ’s, is gamma and neutrino radiation and creation of high- a dimensionless constant, and M is a superstring energy astrophysics with new particles, such as light mass scale. Such an LI-breaking term modifies the neutralinos and gluinos. dispersion relation for a particle ψ and results in as- trophysical consequences [7]. We shall give here a 2. VIOLATION OF LORENTZ INVARIANCE simple example of spontaneous LI breaking accom- panied by modification of the dispersion relation for Violation of Lorentz Invariance (LI) is often an ordinary particle. Let us consider the Lagrangian suspected in astrophysics because of large Lorentz for an ordinary spinor particle factors sometimes being involved. Before describing L ¯ − ¯ L these suspicions, we will discuss the aesthetic side of = iψγµ∂µψ mψψ + int, (3) PHYSICS OF ATOMIC NUCLEI Vol. 66 No. 3 2003 PUZZLES IN ASTROPHYSICS 425 where interaction with the superheavy field Tµν is 2.3. Astrophysical Tests of Special Relativity described by The GZK cutoff involves Lorentz transformations ∼ ∼ 11 L ¯ with the Lorentz factor Γ mπ/ γ 10 ,where int = 2 Tµν ψγµ∂ν ψ.