1: % PRC XX
2: %--------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|
3: %\documentclass[twocolumn,aps,prc,amssymb,tightenlines,showpacs,endfloats]
4: %\documentclass[preprint,aps,prc,amssymb,tightenlines,showpacs,endfloats]
5: \documentclass[twocolumn,aps,prc,showpacs,amssymb,floatfix,10pt]
6: {revtex4}
7: \usepackage{exscale,times} %,t1enc} % times font
8: %\usepackage{txfonts} % math fonts
9: %\usepackage{mathptmx} % math+times fonts
10: \usepackage{bm} % bold math
11: \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx} % Include figure files
12: \usepackage{dcolumn} % Align table columns on decimal point
13: %\usepackage{showkeys} % show labels and citations
14: %\usepackage{amsmath}
15: %\usepackage{wrapfig,fancybox}%,epsfig}
16: %\DeclareGraphicsRule{.ps}
17: %\nofiles
18: %\graphicspath{{fig/}}
19:
20: \begin{document}
21: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}
22: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
23: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
24: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
25: \def\rra{\right\rangle}
26: \def\lla{\left\langle}
27: \def\rv{\bm{r}}
28: \def\la{\Lambda}
29: \def\sgm{\Sigma^-}
30: \def\eps{\epsilon}
31: \def\ms{M_\odot}
32: \def\bc{B=100\;\rm MeV\!/fm^3}
33: \def\beff{B_{\rm eff}(\rho_B)}
34: \def\sc{\sigma_{\rm crit} \approx 70\;\rm MeV\!/fm^2}
35: \def\qc{\rho_{\rm ch}}
36: %\def\qc{q}
37: \def\fv{f_V}
38: %\def\fv{\chi}
39:
40: %--------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|
41: %\draft
42:
43: \title{Hadron-quark mixed phase in hyperon stars}
44:
45: \author{
46: Toshiki Maruyama,$^1$
47: Satoshi Chiba,$^1$
48: Hans-Josef Schulze,$^2$ and
49: Toshitaka Tatsumi$^3$
50: }
51:
52: \affiliation{
53: $^1$ Advanced Science Research Center, Japan Atomic Energy Agency,
54: Tokai, Ibaraki 319-1195, Japan \\
55: $^2$ INFN Sezione di Catania,
56: Via Santa Sofia 64, I-95123 Catania, Italy \\
57: $^3$ Department of Physics, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan
58: }
59:
60: %\date{\today}
61:
62: \begin{abstract}
63: We analyze the different possibilities for the hadron-quark phase transition
64: occurring in beta-stable matter including hyperons in neutron stars.
65: We use a Brueckner-Hartree-Fock approach including hyperons for the hadronic
66: equation of state and a generalized MIT bag model for the quark part.
67: We then point out in detail the differences between Maxwell and Gibbs phase
68: transition constructions
69: including the effects of surface tension and electromagnetic screening.
70: We find only a small influence on the maximum neutron star mass,
71: whereas the radius of the star and in particular its internal structure
72: are more affected.
73: \end{abstract}
74:
75: %\bigskip
76: \pacs{
77: 26.60.+c, % Nuclear aspects of neutron stars
78: 24.10.Cn, % Many-body theory
79: 97.60.Jd, % Neutron stars
80: 12.39.Ba % Bag model
81: % 21.65.+f, % Nuclear matter
82: % 13.75.Ev, % Hyperon-nucleon interactions
83: % 13.75.Cs, % Nucleon-nucleon interactions
84: % 26.50.+x, % Nuclear physics aspects of novae, supernovae, and other explosive environments
85: % 97.10.Cv, % Stellar structure, interiors, evolution, nucleosynthesis, ages
86: % 97.60.Gb, % Pulsars
87: % 12.39.-x, % Phenomenological quark models
88: % 25.75.Nq, % Quark deconfinement, QGP production, and phase transitions in relativistic HIC
89: % 12.38.Mh, % Quark-gluon plasma in quantum chromodynamics
90: }
91: %\vskip1cm
92:
93: \maketitle
94:
95:
96: \section{Introduction}%--------------------------------------------------------
97:
98: The theoretical understanding of neutron star (NS) structure requires
99: the knowledge of the equation of state (EOS) of highly compressed cold
100: baryonic matter, up to densities of about ten times normal nuclear density,
101: $\rho_0 \approx 0.17\;\rm fm^{-3}$ \cite{ns}.
102: In such an extreme environment, the appearance of ``exotic'' components
103: of matter, such as hyperons, meson condensates, and quark matter (QM),
104: is expected \cite{nshyp}.
105:
106: It is in fact well known that hyperons appear at around \hbox{2--3$\,\rho_0$}
107: in beta-stable nuclear matter and lead to a strong softening of the EOS
108: with a consequent substantial reduction
109: of the maximum NS mass \cite{gle,glenhyp}.
110: The theoretical maximum mass of hyperonic NS can even result below current
111: observational values of about 1.5 solar masses \cite{nsmass},
112: as in the case of the microscopic Brueckner-Hartree-Fock (BHF) approach
113: for the hyperonic EOS \cite{hypns,hypns2},
114: which we employ in this work for the hadronic phase.
115: This would imply the presence of nonhadronic ``quark'' matter in the
116: interior of massive NS \cite{mit,njl,cdm,njlc},
117: heavier than the maximum mass hyperon stars.
118:
119: However, the appearance of quark matter poses the problem of
120: an accurate theoretical description of the quark phase,
121: which is so far an open question,
122: and furthermore of the
123: details of the phase transition between hadronic and quark matter.
124: The purpose of this article is the study of the latter problem,
125: combining the BHF EOS of hyperonic matter with a generalized
126: phenomenological MIT bag model for the quark phase.
127: In our case
128: the EOS of hyperonic matter is so soft that the deconfinement transition
129: occurs at rather low densities, where hyperon contamination is not so large.
130: Assuming the quark deconfinement transition to be of first order,
131: it causes a thermodynamical instability and the mixed phase (MP) appears
132: around the critical density.
133: In the usual Maxwell construction (MC),
134: the MP is composed of two charge-neutral hadron and quark phases
135: and uniform density distributions are assumed in each phase.
136:
137: The properties of the MP are very different,
138: if there are more than one independent chemical potentials, as in our case.
139: Glendenning has pointed out that in this case the MC
140: is not the correct procedure to obtain a thermodynamically well-defined EOS
141: with the MP, but that one must properly satisfy more fundamental
142: requirements by means of the Gibbs conditions \cite{glen}.
143: Since then many works have appeared regarding
144: nuclear pasta structures in low-density nuclear matter
145: \cite{mixmaru,mixmarurev},
146: kaon condensation at several times $\rho_0$ \cite{mixmaru,mixmarurev,chr,nor},
147: and the hadron-quark deconfinement transition
148: \cite{glen,mixmarurev,mix,vos,mixtat}.
149: When the Gibbs conditions are applied to the quark deconfinement transition,
150: the MP is composed of individually charged hadron and quark phases,
151: and baryon number density as well as charge density
152: are nonuniform in each phase,
153: arranged in different geometrical structures.
154:
155: However, electromagnetic and surface contributions
156: to the energy of the MP are only approximately
157: treated in the usual bulk calculations \cite{mix},
158: but could have an important effect \cite{mixmarurev,vos,mixtat,nor}.
159: The quantitative analysis of these corrections
160: (sometimes called {\em finite-size effects}) for the quark
161: deconfinement transition in hyperonic matter is one purpose of this article.
162: We elaborately figure out the roles of the finite-size effects in the
163: mixed phase.
164: We shall see that these effects change remarkably the properties
165: of the mixed phase;
166: e.g., the geometrical structures are destabilized by the
167: charge screening effect for the Coulomb interaction in the extreme case,
168: and the EOS given by the MC is effectively recovered.
169: Regarding hyperon mixing we shall see that the appearance of the
170: mixed phase completely suppresses the appearance of hyperons.
171:
172: Some major results of our work were already presented in another
173: paper \cite{let}, while here we provide more details
174: and furthermore study the influence of the mixed phase
175: %different phase transition scenarios
176: on the global NS observables like mass-radius relation and in particular
177: the maximum mass.
178: We shall see that the global properties of compact stars are little changed,
179: but the structure and property of the internal core are very different,
180: compared to the MC.
181: Such difference may affect the elementary processes like neutrino transport
182: or neutrino emission in the core.
183:
184: In the following,
185: we give in Sec.~\ref{s:bhf} a concise summary of the BHF approach for
186: hyperonic matter that is used,
187: whereas in Sec.~\ref{s:mit} the modified MIT bag model for the quark
188: phase is introduced.
189: Sec.~\ref{s:mix} discusses the details of
190: the properties of the mixed phase and figures out the peculiar role of
191: the finite-size effects.
192: %different hadron-quark phase transition constructions and
193: In Sec.~\ref{s:ns} the EOS including the quark deconfinement transition is
194: applied to the structure of hybrid stars.
195: %Sec.~\ref{s:res} presents our numerical results and
196: Summary and concluding remarks are given in Sec.~\ref{s:end}.
197:
198:
199: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
200: \section{BHF approach of hyperonic matter}
201: \label{s:bhf}
202:
203: Our theoretical framework for the hadronic phase of matter
204: is the nonrelativistic Brueckner-Hartree-Fock approach \cite{bhf}
205: based on microscopic
206: nucleon-nucleon (NN), nucleon-hyperon (NY), and hyperon-hyperon (YY)
207: potentials that are fitted to scattering phase shifts, where possible.
208: Nucleonic three-body forces (TBF) are included in order to (slightly) shift
209: the saturation point of purely nucleonic matter to the empirical value.
210: %These forces also provide the major part of corrections equivalent
211: %to the relativistic Dirac-BHF method \cite{dbhf}.
212:
213: It has been demonstrated that the theoretical basis of the BHF method,
214: the hole-line expansion, is well founded:
215: the nuclear EOS can be calculated with good accuracy in the BHF two hole-line
216: approximation with the continuous choice for the single-particle potential,
217: since the results in this scheme are quite close to the full
218: convergent calculations which include also the three hole-line
219: contributions \cite{thl}.
220: Due to these facts, combined with the absence of adjustable parameters,
221: the BHF model is a reliable and well-controlled theoretical approach
222: for the study of dense baryonic matter.
223:
224: In the following we give a short review of the BHF approach including hyperons.
225: Detailed accounts can be found in Refs.~\cite{hypns,hypmat,vi00}.
226: The basic input quantities in the Bethe-Goldstone equation
227: are the NN, NY, and YY potentials.
228: In this work we use the Argonne $V_{18}$ NN potential \cite{v18} supplemented by
229: the Urbana UIX nucleonic TBF of Ref.~\cite{uix}
230: and the Nijmegen soft-core NSC89 NY potentials \cite{nsc89}
231: that are well adapted to the existing experimental NY scattering data
232: and also compatible with $\la$ hypernuclear levels \cite{yamamoto,vprs01}.
233: Unfortunately, the NSC89 potentials contain no YY components,
234: because up to date no YY scattering data exist.
235: Nevertheless the importance of YY potentials should be minor
236: as long as the hyperonic partial densities remain limited.
237: Recently also calculations using the NSC97 NY and YY potentials \cite{nsc97}
238: were completed, which yield very similar maximum NS masses in spite
239: of quite different internal compositions \cite{hypns2}.
240:
241: With these potentials, the various $G$ matrices are evaluated
242: by solving numerically the Bethe-Goldstone equation, which can be written in
243: operator form as
244: \be
245: G_{ab}[W] = V_{ab} + \sum_c \sum_{p,p'} V_{ac} \big|pp'\big\rangle
246: {Q_c \over W - E_c +i\eps}
247: \big\langle pp'\big| G_{cb}[W] \:,
248: \label{e:g}
249: \ee
250: where the indices $a,b,c$ indicate pairs of baryons
251: and the Pauli operator $Q$ and energy $E$
252: determine the propagation of intermediate baryon pairs.
253: The pair energy in a given channel $c=(ij); i,j=n,p,\la,\sgm$ is
254: \be
255: % E_{(NY)} = Y_N(k_N) + T_Y(k_Y) + U_N(k_N) + U_Y(k_Y) \:.
256: E_{(ij)} = T_{i}(k_{i}) + T_{j}(k_{j})
257: + U_{i}(k_{i}) + U_{j}(k_{j})
258: \label{e:e}
259: \ee
260: with
261: $T_i(k) = m_i + {k^2\!/2m_i}$,
262: where the various single-particle potentials are given by
263: \be
264: U_i(k) =
265: \sum_{j=n,p,\la,\sgm} U_i^{(j)}(k)
266: % \sum_{N'=n,p} U_B^{(N')}(k) + \sum_{Y=\la,\sgm} U_B^{(Y)}(k)
267: \label{e:un}
268: \ee
269: and are determined self-consistently from the $G$ matrices,
270: \be
271: U_i^{(j)}(k) =
272: \!\!\! \sum_{k'<k_F^{(j)}} \!\!\!
273: {\rm Re} \big\langle k k' \big| G_{(ij)(ij)}\big[E_{(ij)}(k,k')\big]
274: \big| k k' \big\rangle \:.
275: \label{e:uy}
276: \ee
277: The coupled equations (\ref{e:g}) to (\ref{e:uy}) define the BHF scheme
278: with the continuous choice of the single-particle energies.
279: In contrast to the standard purely nucleonic calculation,
280: the additional coupled-channel structure renders the calculations
281: quite time-consuming.
282:
283: Once the different single-particle potentials are known,
284: the total nonrelativistic hadronic energy density, $\eps_H$,
285: can be evaluated:
286: \bea
287: % {E\over A} &=& {\eps\over \rho_n+\rho_p+\rho_{\Sigma^-}
288: %+\rho_\la} \:, \\
289: \eps_H \!&=& \!\!\!\!
290: \sum_{i=n,p,\la,\sgm}
291: % \int_0^{k_F^{(B)}}{dk\,k^2\over\pi^2}
292: \sum_{k<k_F^{(i)}}
293: \left[ T_i(k) + {1\over2} U_i(k) \right] \:,
294: \label{e:eps}
295: %\\ &=&
296: % = \eps_N + \eps_Y \:, \phantom{aaa}
297: \eea
298: %where
299: %\bea
300: % \eps_N \!\!&=& \!\!\sum_{N,N'=n,p} \sum_{k<k_F^{(N)}}
301: % \left[ T_N(k) + {1\over2} U_N^{(N')}(k) \right] \:,\label{e:epsn}\\
302: % \eps_Y \!\!&=& \!\!\!\! \sum_{Y,Y'=\la,\sgm \atop \, N=n,p}
303: % %\int_0^{k_F^{(Y)}} {dk\,k^2\over\pi^2}
304: % \sum_{k<k_F^{(Y)}}
305: % \left[ T_Y(k) + U_Y^{(N)}(k) + {1\over2}U_Y^{(Y')}(k) \right]
306: % \:. \phantom{aaa}\label{e:epsy}
307: %\eea
308: and $\eps_H$ is thus represented as a function of particle number densities
309: $\rho_i (i=n,p,\la,\sgm)$ for a given baryon number density $\rho_B$.
310: Knowing the hadronic energy density,
311: and adding the contributions of the noninteracting leptons ($l=e,\mu$),
312: $\eps=\eps_H+\eps_L$,
313: the various chemical potentials
314: $\mu_i = \partial\eps / \partial\rho_i$
315: (of the species $i=n,p,\la,\sgm,e,\mu$)
316: can be computed straightforwardly
317: %\be \mu_i = {\partial \eps \over \partial \rho_i} \:, \ee
318: and the equations for beta-equilibrium,
319: \be
320: \mu_i = B_i \mu_n - Q_i \mu_e \:,
321: \label{e:mu}
322: \ee
323: ($B_i$ and $Q_i$ denoting baryon number and electric charge of species $i$),
324: baryon number density and charge neutrality,
325: \bea
326: \sum_i B_i \rho_i &=& \rho_B \:,
327: \\
328: \sum_i Q_i \rho_i &=& 0 \:,
329: \eea
330: allow one to determine the equilibrium composition $\rho_i(\rho_B)$
331: at a given baryon number density $\rho_B$ %=\rho_n+\rho_p$
332: and finally the hadronic EOS,
333: \be
334: P_H(\rho_B) = \rho_B^2 {d\over d\rho_B}
335: {\eps(\rho_i(\rho_B))\over \rho_B}
336: = \rho_B {d\eps \over d\rho_B} - \eps
337: \:.
338: \ee
339:
340:
341: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
342: \section{Quark matter EOS}
343: \label{s:mit}
344:
345: Unfortunately, the current theoretical description of quark matter
346: is burdened with large uncertainties, seriously limiting the
347: predictive power of any theoretical approach at high baryonic density.
348: For the time being we can therefore only resort
349: to phenomenological models for the quark matter EOS
350: and try to constrain them as well as possible
351: by the few experimental information available on high-density baryonic matter.
352:
353: One important condition is due to the fact
354: that certainly in symmetric nuclear matter no phase transition is observed
355: below $\approx 3\rho_0$.
356: %In fact some theoretical interpretation of the heavy ion experiments performed
357: %at the CERN SPS \cite{cern} points to a possible phase transition at a critical
358: %density $\rho_c \approx 6\rho_0 \approx 1/{\rm fm}^3$.
359: We will in the following use an extended MIT bag model \cite{chodos}
360: (requiring a density-dependent bag ``constant'')
361: that is compatible with this condition.
362:
363:
364: \subsection{The MIT bag model}
365:
366: We first review briefly the description of the bulk properties of
367: uniform quark matter,
368: deconfined from the beta-stable hadronic matter mentioned in the
369: previous section, by using the MIT bag model \cite{chodos}.
370: The energy density of the $f=u, d, s$ quark gas
371: can be expressed as a sum of the kinetic term
372: and the leading-order one-gluon-exchange term \cite{quark,jaf}
373: for the interaction energy
374: proportional to the QCD fine structure constant $\alpha_s$,
375: \bea
376: \epsilon_Q &=& B + \sum_f \epsilon_f \:,
377: \\
378: \epsilon_f(\rho_f) &=& {3m_f^4 \over 8\pi^2} \bigg[
379: { x_f\left(2x_f^2+1\right)\sqrt{1 + x_f^2}} - {\rm arsinh}\,x_f \bigg]
380: \nonumber \\
381: && - \alpha_s{m_f^4\over \pi^3} \bigg[
382: x_f^4 - {3\over2}\Big( x_f \sqrt{1 + x_f^2} - {\rm arsinh}\,x_f \Big)^2
383: \bigg] \:,
384: \nonumber \\&&
385: \eea
386: where $m_f$ is the $f$ current quark mass,
387: $x_f = k_F^{(f)}\!/m_f$,
388: %$y_f = \sqrt{1 + x_f^2} = E_F^{(f)}\!/m_f$.
389: the number density of $f$ quarks is $\rho_f = {k_F^{(f)}}^3\!\!/\pi^2$,
390: and $B$ is the energy density difference between
391: the perturbative vacuum and the true vacuum, i.e., the bag ``constant.''
392: We use massless $u$ and $d$ quarks and $m_s= 150$ MeV.
393:
394: It has been found \cite{mit,alford} that within the MIT bag model
395: (without color superconductivity) with a density-independent bag
396: constant $B$, the maximum mass of a NS cannot exceed a value of
397: about 1.6 solar masses.
398: Indeed, the maximum mass increases as the
399: value of $B$ decreases, but too small values of $B$ are incompatible
400: with a hadron-quark transition density $\rho_B >$ 2--3 $\rho_0$ in
401: nearly symmetric nuclear matter,
402: as demanded by heavy-ion collision phenomenology.
403: Values of $B\gtrsim 150\;\rm MeV\!/fm^{3}$
404: can also be excluded within our model,
405: since we do not obtain any more a phase transition in beta-stable matter
406: in combination with our hadronic EOS \cite{mit}.
407:
408: In order to overcome these restrictions of the model,
409: one can introduce empirically a density-dependent bag parameter $\beff$,
410: which has not any more the simple interpretation as the energy difference
411: between the perturbative and the true vacua;
412: instead some density dependence originating from the non-perturbative
413: interaction energy $\Delta\epsilon_{\rm int}(\rho_B)$
414: is considered to be included in the effective bag constant, i.e.,
415: $\beff = B + \Delta\epsilon_{\rm int}(\rho_B)$ \cite{cdm}.
416: This allows one to lower the value of $B$ at large density,
417: providing a stiffer QM EOS and increasing the value of the maximum NS mass,
418: while at the same time still fulfilling the condition of no phase
419: transition below $\rho_B \approx 3 \rho_0$ in symmetric matter.
420: In the following we present results based on the MIT model using both
421: a constant value of the bag parameter, $\bc$, and a
422: Gaussian parametrization for the density dependence,
423: \be
424: \beff = B + (B_0 - B)
425: \exp\left[-\beta\Big(\frac{\rho_B}{\rho_0}\Big)^2 \right]
426: \label{eq:param}
427: \ee
428: with $B= 50\;\rm MeV\!/fm^{3}$,
429: $B_0 = 400\;\rm MeV\!/fm^{3}$, and $\beta=0.17$.
430: For a more extensive discussion of this topic, the reader is referred to
431: Refs.~\cite{mit,njl,cdm}.
432:
433: The introduction of a density-dependent bag parameter
434: has to be taken into account properly for the
435: computation of various thermodynamical quantities;
436: in particular the quark chemical potentials
437: %and the pressure
438: are modified as
439: \bea
440: \mu_f &\rightarrow& \mu_f + {1\over3}{d\beff \over d\rho_B} \:.
441: \label{e:murho}
442: %\\
443: % P &\rightarrow& P + \rho_B {d\beff \over d\rho_B} \:.
444: \eea
445: Nevertheless, due to a cancellation of the second term in (\ref{e:murho}),
446: occurring in relations (\ref{e:chem}) for the beta-equilibrium,
447: the composition of QM at a given total baryon number density remains unaffected
448: by this term (and is in fact independent of $B$).
449: At this stage of investigation, we disregard possible dependencies
450: of the bag parameter on the individual quark densities.
451:
452: In the beta-stable pure quark phase,
453: the individual quark chemical potentials
454: are fixed by Eq.~(\ref{e:mu}) with $B_f=1/3$,
455: which implies
456: \be
457: \mu_d = \mu_s = \mu_u + \mu_l \:.
458: \label{e:chem}
459: \ee
460: The charge neutrality condition and the total
461: baryon number conservation read
462: \bea
463: 0 &=& \frac{2}{3}\rho_u - \frac{1}{3}\rho_d - \frac{1}{3}\rho_s - \rho_l \:,
464: \\
465: \rho_B &=& \frac{1}{3}\left(\rho_u + \rho_d + \rho_s\right) \:.
466: \label{e:baryon}
467: \eea
468: These equations determine the composition $\rho_f(\rho_B)$
469: and the pressure of the QM phase,
470: \be
471: P_Q(\rho_B) = \rho_B^2 {d(\eps_Q/\rho_B) \over d\rho_B}\:.
472: \ee
473:
474: The modified bag model is clearly an oversimplified model of QM,
475: but in this article we focus mainly on the differences
476: between the different hadron-quark phase transition constructions
477: in NS matter introduced in the following.
478:
479:
480: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
481: \section{Hadron-quark phase transition}
482: \label{s:mix}
483:
484: \subsection{Gibbs conditions and the mixed phase}
485:
486: \begin{figure}%[t]%............................................................
487: \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{EOS-H-alp-Brho2.ps}
488: \caption{
489: (Color online)
490: EOS of beta-stable hadronic matter (black curves)
491: and quark matter (colored curves)
492: with constant $B=60\;\rm MeV\!/fm^3$ (lower curves)
493: and $B=100\;\rm MeV\!/fm^3$ (upper curves)
494: for several values of $\alpha_s$.
495: The gray curve shows the result for the $\beff$ model with $\alpha_s=0$.
496: Hyperons appear at the dotted point in hadronic matter.}
497: \label{figParam}
498: \end{figure}%..................................................................
499:
500: Figure~\ref{figParam} compares the hadronic BHF EOS
501: and the quark matter EOS with
502: different values of the parameters $B$ and $\alpha_s$
503: for beta-stable and charge-neutral matter.
504: One can see that the quark EOS approaches that of a relativistic
505: free gas ($E/A \sim \rho_B^{1/3}$) with increasing density,
506: while the hyperonic EOS is always soft.
507: Consequently the quark deconfinement transition
508: cannot occur at too high densities.
509: If we demand the quark and the hyperonic EOS to cross,
510: $\alpha_s$ should be small and $B$ slightly large,
511: which gives a relatively low critical density.
512: Thus the appearance of hyperons is effectively suppressed
513: due to a quark deconfinement transition.
514: In this article we choose $\alpha_s=0$ and
515: compare results with $\bc$ and $\beff$.
516:
517: Since we shall see that two independent chemical potentials,
518: charge chemical potential and baryon number chemical potential,
519: are needed to specify the thermodynamical properties of the MP,
520: we must properly take into account the Gibbs conditions \cite{mix},
521: which require the pressure balance and the equality of the chemical potentials
522: between the two phases besides the thermal equilibrium.
523: We employ a Wigner-Seitz approximation in which the whole space
524: is divided into equivalent cells with a given geometrical symmetry,
525: specified by the dimensionality
526: $d=3$ (sphere), $d=2$ (rod), or $d=1$ (slab).
527: In each cell with volume $V_W$ the quark and hadron phases are separated:
528: a lump portion made of the quark phase with volume $V_Q$ is embedded
529: in the hadronic phase with volume $V_H$ or vice versa.
530: A sharp boundary is assumed between the two phases and the surface energy
531: is taken into account in terms of a surface-tension parameter $\sigma$.
532: The surface tension of the hadron-quark interface is poorly known,
533: but some theoretical estimates based on the MIT bag model
534: for strangelets \cite{jaf} and
535: lattice gauge simulations at finite temperature \cite{latt} suggest
536: a range of $\sigma \approx 10-100\;\rm MeV\!/fm^2$.
537: We show results using $\sigma=40\;\rm MeV\!/fm^2$
538: in this article, and discuss the effects of its variation.
539:
540: We use the Thomas-Fermi approximation for the density profiles of
541: hadrons and quarks.
542: The energy for each cell is then given as
543: \be
544: E = \int_{V_H}\!\!\! d^3\rv\, \eps_H[\rho_i(\rv)]
545: + \int_{V_Q}\!\!\! d^3\rv\, \eps_Q[\rho_f(\rv)] + E_e + E_C + \sigma S
546: \ee
547: with $i=n,p,\la,\sgm$, $f=u,d,s$,
548: and $S$ being the hadron-quark interface area.
549: $E_e$ is the electron gas kinetic energy,
550: \be
551: E_e = \int_{V_W}\!\!\! d^3\rv\, \eps_e[\rho_e(\rv)] \:,
552: \ee
553: approximated by
554: $\eps_e[\rho_e] \simeq (3\pi^2\rho_e)^{4/3}\!/4\pi^2$.
555: %
556: For simplicity muon is not included in this article.
557: %
558: $E_C$ is the Coulomb interaction energy,
559: \be
560: E_C = \frac{e^2}{2} \int_{V_W}\!\!\! d^3\rv d^3\rv'\,
561: {\qc(\rv)\qc(\rv') \over |\rv-\rv'|} \:,
562: \ee
563: where the charge density is given by
564: $e\qc(\rv) = \sum_{i=n,p,\la,\sgm,e} Q_i\rho_i(\rv)$ in $V_H$
565: and
566: $e\qc(\rv) = \sum_{f=u,d,s,e} Q_f \rho_f(\rv)$ in $V_Q$
567: with $Q_a$ being the particle charge
568: ($Q=-e < 0$ for the electron).
569: Accordingly, the Coulomb potential $\phi(\rv)$ is defined as
570: \be
571: \phi(\rv) = -\int_{V_W}\!\!\! d^3\rv'\,
572: {e^2 \qc(\rv') \over \left| \rv - \rv' \right|} + \phi_0 \:,
573: \label{e:vcoul}
574: \ee
575: where $\phi_0$ is an arbitrary constant representing
576: the gauge degree of freedom.
577: We fix it by stipulating the condition
578: $\phi(R_W) = 0$,
579: as before \cite{vos,mixtat,mixmaru}.
580: The Poisson equation then reads
581: \bea
582: \Delta \phi (\rv) = 4 \pi e^2 \qc(\rv) \:.
583: \label{e:poisson}
584: \eea
585:
586: The density profiles of the hadrons,
587: $\rho_i(\rv),\ i=n,p,\la,\sgm$,
588: and quarks, $\rho_f(\rv),\ f=u,d,s$,
589: are determined by the equations of motion,
590: \be
591: {\delta (E/V_W) \over \delta\rho_a(\rv)} = \mu_a \:,
592: \label{e:eom}
593: \ee
594: where we introduced the chemical potentials $\mu_a$ for the particle species
595: $a=n,p,\la,\sgm,u,d,s,e$.
596: Note that some additional terms are needed for the
597: quark chemical potentials in the case of $\beff$ [see Eq.~(\ref{e:murho})].
598: We consider chemical equilibrium at the hadron-quark
599: interface as well as inside each phase,
600: so that Eq.~(\ref{e:mu}) implies
601: \bea
602: && \mu_u+\mu_e = \mu_d = \mu_s \:,
603: \nonumber\\
604: && \mu_p+\mu_e = \mu_n = \mu_\la = \mu_u + 2\mu_d \:,
605: \nonumber\\
606: && \mu_{\sgm} + \mu_p = 2\mu_n \:.
607: \label{e:chemeq}
608: \eea
609: There are two independent chemical potentials, which are usually chosen as
610: the charge chemical potential $\mu_Q=\mu_e$ and the baryon number chemical
611: potential $\mu_B=\mu_n$.
612: For a given baryon number density
613: \be
614: \rho_B = {1\over V_W}\! \left[
615: \sum_{i=n,p,\la,\sgm} \int_{V_H}\!\!\!\! d^3\rv \rho_i(\rv)
616: +\! \sum_{f=u,d,s} \int_{V_Q}\!\!\!\! d^3\rv {\rho_f(\rv)\over3} \right] \:,
617: \ee
618: Eqs.~(\ref{e:poisson}--\ref{e:chemeq}),
619: together with the global charge neutrality condition,
620: $\int_{V_W}\!\!{d^3\rv} \qc(\rv)=0$,
621: obviously fulfill the requirements by the Gibbs conditions.
622: The optimum dimensionality $d$ of the cell or the lump,
623: the cell size $R_W$, and the lump size $R$
624: [or equivalently the volume fraction $\fv\equiv (R/R_W)^d$],
625: %and density profile of each component
626: are searched for to give the minimum energy.
627:
628: Note that the Poisson equation~(\ref{e:poisson}) is a highly non-linear
629: equation with respect to the Coulomb potential through Eq.~(\ref{e:eom}).
630: If we linearize it, we obtain the Debye screening length
631: \be
632: {1\over \lambda_D^2} = 4\pi e\sum_{i}
633: Q_i {\partial\langle \qc \rangle \over \partial\mu_i} \:,
634: \ee
635: (with
636: $i=n,p,\la,\sgm,e$ and $i=u,d,s,e$
637: in the hadron and quark phases, respectively),
638: which gives a rough measure to estimate how effective is the charge screening.
639: We shall see that
640: $\lambda_D \sim {\cal O}({\rm several~fm})\lesssim R,R_W$,
641: which confirms the importance of the screening effect.
642: We use the relaxation method to solve
643: Eqs.~(\ref{e:poisson}--\ref{e:chemeq}) consistently.
644: The details of the numerical procedure to calculate the EOS and determine the
645: geometrical structure of the MP
646: are similar to that in Refs.~\cite{mixtat,mixmaru}.
647:
648:
649: \subsection{Charge screening effect and the Maxwell construction}
650:
651: \begin{figure}%[b]%............................................................
652: \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{ProfGibbsMaxMixSigm40.ps}
653: \caption{
654: (Color online)
655: Upper panel:
656: Density profiles %(thin black lines)
657: and Coulomb potential $\phi$ %(thick gray line)
658: within a 3D (quark droplet) Wigner-Seitz cell
659: of the MP at $\rho_B=0.4$ fm$^{-3}$.
660: The cell radius and the droplet radius are $R_W=21.6$ fm
661: and $R=13.8$ fm, respectively.
662: Middle panel:
663: Density profiles in the MC case, where only the volume fraction is calculated,
664: while the absolute values of $R$ and $R_W$ are irrelevant.
665: We use the same $R_W$ as in the upper panel, while the volume fraction
666: of the quark phase is different, $\fv=0.375$.
667: See Fig.~\ref{figRad} for the volume fraction.
668: The results are for the $\bc$,
669: $\alpha_s=0$, $\sigma=40\;\rm MeV\!/fm^2$
670: %quark model.
671: case.
672: %ADD PLOT FOR BULK CONSTRUCTION
673: Lower panel:
674: Density profiles in the bulk Gibbs calculation.
675: }
676: \label{figProf}
677: \end{figure}%..................................................................
678:
679: Figure~\ref{figProf} shows an example of the density profile in a 3D cell
680: for $\rho_B=0.4\;\rm fm^{-3}$ and the $\bc$ case.
681: One observes a non-uniform density distribution of each particle species
682: together with the finite Coulomb potential, while bulk calculations use
683: a uniform density without the Coulomb interaction \cite{mit,glen,mix}.
684: This is due to the charge screening effect: the charged particle
685: distribution is rearranged to give
686: %the smallest Coulomb interaction energy.
687: smaller Coulomb interaction energy.
688: Different from the MC case (middle panel),
689: where local charge neutrality is implicitly assumed,
690: the quark phase is negatively charged, so that
691: $d$ and $s$ quarks are repelled to the phase boundary,
692: while $u$ quarks gather at the center.
693: Thus local charge neutrality is obviously violated at any point
694: inside the cell, even at the center of the droplet or
695: at the boundary of the cell.
696: The hadron phase is positively charged:
697: protons are attracted by the negatively charged quark lump,
698: while electrons are repelled.
699: We shall see that such rearrangement gives rise to a remarkable effect
700: on the energy of the MP.
701:
702: The density dependence of the optimal structures and their characteristic
703: dimensions $R$, $R_W$, and the volume fraction $\fv$
704: are shown in Fig.~\ref{figRad}.
705: One observes a transition from droplet to slab to tube to bubble
706: with increasing density.
707: With $\bc$ and $\beff$,
708: the MP occurs in the interval
709: $\rho_B=0.298$ -- $0.708\;\rm fm^{-3}$ and
710: $\rho_B=0.236$ -- $0.670\;\rm fm^{-3}$, respectively,
711: i.e., it appears at less than twice normal nuclear density
712: and extends up to much larger density,
713: relevant for NS physics.
714: The transitions between the different geometric structures are
715: by construction discontinuous
716: and a more sophisticated approach would be required for a more
717: realistic description of this feature.
718:
719:
720: In the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{figProf}, shown is the case of bulk Gibbs calculation.
721: The local charge neutrality is not realized as in the full calculation.
722: However, by ignoring the Coulomb interaction, the density distribution
723: in each phase is uniform.
724:
725:
726: \begin{figure}%................................................................
727: \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{RadSigm40.ps}
728: \caption{
729: (Color online)
730: Wigner-Seitz cell radius $R_W$ (upper colored segments),
731: droplet radius $R$ (lower colored segments),
732: and volume fraction $\fv$ (black segments)
733: as a function of baryon density.
734: The results are for the $\bc$,
735: $\alpha_s=0$, $\sigma=40\;\rm MeV\!/fm^2$
736: case.}
737: %for the $\bc$ (upper panel) and the $\beff$ (lower panel) quark model.}
738: \label{figRad}
739: \end{figure}%..................................................................
740:
741: \begin{figure}%[t]%............................................................
742: \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{EOS-all-alp0tau40BG.ps}
743: \caption{
744: (Color online)
745: EOS of the MP (thick curves)
746: in comparison with pure hadron and quark phases (thin curves).
747: The upper panel shows the energy per baryon $E/A$,
748: the middle panel the energy difference between mixed and
749: hadron ($\rho_B<0.44\;\rm fm^{-3}$)
750: or quark ($\rho_B>0.44\;\rm fm^{-3}$) phases,
751: and the lower panel the pressure.
752: Different colored segments of the MP are chosen by minimizing the energy.
753: The EOS within the MC
754: (between $\rho_H=0.34\;\rm fm^{-3}$ and $\rho_Q=0.50\;\rm fm^{-3}$)
755: is also shown for comparison
756: (thick black curves).}
757: \label{figEOS}
758: \end{figure}%..................................................................
759:
760: \begin{figure}%[t]%............................................................
761: \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{R-dep2b}
762: \caption{
763: (Color online)
764: Droplet radius ($R$) dependence of the energy per baryon
765: for fixed baryon density $\rho_B=0.35$ fm$^{-3}$
766: and different surface tensions.
767: For any value of $R$, the density profiles and the cell size $R_W$
768: are optimized.
769: %The quark volume fraction $(R/R_W)^3$ is fixed
770: %to the optimal value at $R=R_{\rm min}$ for each curve.
771: Dots on the curves show the local energy minima.
772: The black line shows the energy of the MC case.
773: }
774: \label{figRdep}
775: \end{figure}%..................................................................
776:
777: Figure~\ref{figEOS} (upper panel) compares for $\bc$
778: the resulting energy per baryon of
779: the hadron-quark MP with that of the pure hadron and quark phases
780: over the relevant range of baryon density.
781: The thick black curve indicates the case of the MC,
782: while the colored line indicates the MP
783: in its various geometric realizations by the full calculation.
784: %starting at $\rho_B=0.326$ fm$^{-3}$ with a quark droplet structure
785: %and ending at $\rho_B=0.666$ fm$^{-3}$ with a hadron bubble structure.
786: While the structure and the composition of the MP by the full calculation
787: are very different from those of the MC case, as shown before,
788: the energy of the MP is only slightly lower than that of the MC,
789: and the resulting EOS is similar to the MC one.
790:
791: The pressure is presented in the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{figEOS}.
792: In the MC case, where local charge neutrality is implicitly assumed,
793: the two equilibrium densities
794: $\rho_H\approx 0.34\;\rm fm^{-3}$ and
795: $\rho_Q\approx 0.50\; \rm fm^{-3}$
796: of the pure phases are connected by a straight line with equal pressure
797: $P_H(\rho_H)=P_Q(\rho_Q)$.
798: Compared with the MC,
799: the pressure of the MP smoothly interpolates the pressures of
800: the hadron and quark phases and is no more constant.
801: We shall see that the
802: difference between the MC and our
803: %exact procedure
804: full calculation
805: %
806: causes no serious difference regarding the bulk properties of
807: compact stars like the mass-radius relation.
808: However, the internal properties are very different between the two cases,
809: which may affect the microscopic elementary processes
810: in the MP \cite{red}.
811:
812: If one uses a smaller surface tension parameter $\sigma$,
813: the energy gets lower and the density range of the MP gets wider.
814: The limit of $\sigma=0$ leads to a bulk application of
815: the Gibbs conditions without the Coulomb and surface effects, i.e.,
816: the so-called Glendenning construction \cite{gle}.
817: On the other hand, using a larger value of $\sigma$,
818: the geometrical structures increase in size and
819: the EOS gets closer to that of the MC case.
820: Above a critical value of $\sc$
821: the structure of the MP becomes mechanically unstable \cite{vos}:
822: for a fixed volume fraction $(R/R_W)^3$
823: the optimal values of $R$ and $R_W$ go to infinity
824: and local charge neutrality is recovered in the MP,
825: where the energy density equals that of the MC
826: (see Fig.~\ref{figRdep}).
827: %This feature implies a maximum size of the geometrical structures
828: %of the MP.
829:
830: This mechanical instability is %due to the
831: a charge screening effect:
832: The optimal values of $R$ and $R_W$ are basically determined by the
833: balance between the Coulomb energy ($\sim R^2$ in the 3D case)
834: and the surface energy ($\sim R^{-1}$).
835: However, if the charge screening is taken into account, the contribution of
836: the screened Coulomb potential $\phi$ is strongly reduced % as $R^{-1}$
837: when $R,R_W \rightarrow \infty$.
838: A careful analysis by Voskresensky et al.~showed that the Coulomb
839: energy changes its sign and behaves like
840: $R^{-1}$ as $R \rightarrow\infty$
841: due to the charge screening %effect
842: \cite{vos}.
843: Thus the surface and the Coulomb energy give a local energy minimum below $\sc$,
844: which disappears when the surface energy
845: becomes greater than the Coulomb energy above $\sc$.
846: This is in contrast to the work of Heiselberg et al.~\cite{mix},
847: neglecting the charge screening effect,
848: where there is always a local energy minimum at finite $R$.
849: The importance of the charge screening effect has also been
850: discussed in the context of the stability of strangelets \cite{hei}.
851:
852: If we assume uniform density profiles
853: with a given volume fraction $\fv = (R/R_W)^d$
854: and the difference $\delta\qc = e(\qc^{(H)}-\qc^{(Q)})$
855: of the charge density between the two phases,
856: it is easy to see how the optimal size of the lump is determined
857: from the competition between the Coulomb and surface energy
858: contributions \cite{gle,rav}:
859: The Coulomb interaction energy is in this case
860: \be
861: {E_C\over V_W} = 2\pi^2 (\delta\qc)^2 R^2
862: {\fv\over d+2}
863: \left[ \fv + {2 - d \fv^{1-2/d} \over d-2} \right] \:,
864: \ee
865: while the surface energy is simply
866: $E_S/V_W = d \sigma \fv/R$.
867: Hence there is always one energy minimum at finite $R$
868: for a given $\fv$ as a consequence of the balance between
869: the Coulomb energy and the surface energy \cite{mix}.
870:
871: However, when the Coulomb screening is present,
872: the charge density is no more uniform, see Fig.~\ref{figProf},
873: but is rearranged to attain
874: %the smallest Coulomb interaction energy.
875: smaller Coulomb interaction energy.
876: Consequently the Coulomb potential becomes short range
877: due to the Debye screening of the charged particles.
878: The contribution of this many-body effect to the energy is then twofold:
879: one is the direct contribution of the Coulomb interaction energy
880: and the other indirectly via the rearrangement effect of the
881: charge density, which is called the correlation energy in Ref.~\cite{vos}.
882: Considering $\rho_a(\rv)$ as an implicit function of $\phi(\rv)$,
883: the kinetic and strong interaction energies can be expanded with respect
884: to the particle densities around their uniform values,
885: \be
886: E_{\rm corr} = E_{\rm corr}^0
887: +\!\!\!\! \sum_{i={n,p,\la,\sgm \atop u,d,s}} \int_{V_W}\!\!d^3\rv
888: \mu_i^0 (\rv) \left[ \rho_i(\rv) - \rho_i^0 \right]
889: \; +\, \cdots \:,
890: \ee
891: where $E_{\rm corr}^0 = E_H^0 + E_Q^0$,
892: $\mu_i^0$, and $\rho_i^0$
893: are the quantities for the system with
894: uniform densities in the absence of the Coulomb screening.
895: Thus the correlation energy gives rise to a new $R$-dependence
896: in the energy density.
897: The analysis of Voskresensky et al.~showed that the contributions
898: from the screened Coulomb potential and the correlation energy
899: exhibit a $R^{-1}$ dependence for large $R$,
900: and that both have different signs \cite{vos}.
901: When the surface energy is added, we
902: can easily see that the energy density has a local minimum at finite $R$
903: as long as $\sigma$ is not too large.
904: Actually this local minimum disappears above a critical value $\sc$,
905: which implies a mechanical instability of the structure in the MP.
906:
907:
908: \subsection{Hyperons in the mixed phase}
909:
910: \begin{figure}%[t]%............................................................
911: \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{ratio-alp0tau40Mx3b.ps}
912: \caption{
913: (Color online)
914: Particle fractions
915: %Relative abundances
916: of quark and hadron species in the MP by the full calculation (upper panel),
917: the MC (middle panel), and the Bulk Gibbs construction (lower panel).
918: In the MC the phase transition occurs between the pure phases with
919: $\rho_H=0.34$ fm$^{-3}$ and $\rho_Q=0.50\;\rm fm^{-3}$.}
920: \label{figRatio}
921: \end{figure}%..................................................................
922:
923: One notes in Fig.~\ref{figProf}
924: that no hyperons appear in the MP
925: although the mean baryon density $\rho_B=0.4\;\rm fm^{-3}$
926: is higher than the threshold density for hyperons
927: in pure nucleon matter, $\rho_B\approx0.34\;\rm fm^{-3}$
928: (see the black dot in Fig.~\ref{figParam}).
929: In fact in the MC a small fraction of $\sgm$ hyperons is present,
930: as displayed in the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{figProf}.
931:
932: This is confirmed in Fig.~\ref{figRatio}, where we compare the
933: particle fractions as a function of baryon density in the full calculation (upper panel),
934: the MC (middle panel), and the Bulk Gibbs construction (lower panel).
935: One can see that the compositions are very different in the three cases,
936: the MP by the full calculation lying in between the extreme cases of Bulk Gibbs and MC.
937: In particular, a relevant hyperon ($\sgm$) fraction is only present in the
938: hadronic component of the MC.
939: In this case the phase transition occurs at constant pressure between
940: the pure hadron and quark phases
941: with the equilibrium densities $\rho_H=0.34$ fm$^{-3}$
942: and $\rho_Q=0.50\;\rm fm^{-3}$,
943: and for a given $\rho_B$ the volume fraction of the quark phase is
944: $0 \leq \fv = (\rho_B-\rho_H)/(\rho_Q-\rho_H) \leq 1$.
945: Accordingly the hyperon number fraction is always finite in the MC,
946: but in the full calculation and the Bulk Gibbs case hyperons are completely suppressed.
947:
948: This hyperon suppression is due to the absence of the
949: charge-neutrality condition in each phase.
950: In a charge-neutral hadron phase,
951: hyperons ($\sgm$) appear at $\rho_B=0.34\;\rm fm^{-3}$.
952: This is to reduce the electron Fermi energy by replacing the
953: negative charge of electrons with that of $\sgm$ particles.
954: In the MP, on the other hand, the hadron phase can be
955: positively charged due to the presence of the negatively charged quark phase.
956: This causes the reduction of electron density and chemical potential
957: in the hadron phase and, consequently, $\sgm$ is suppressed.
958: In other words, with the charge-neutrality condition hyperons appear at
959: low density to reduce the energies of electrons and neutrons in spite of
960: large hyperon masses (see Fig.~\ref{figRatioUnif}).
961: Without charge-neutrality condition, hyperons appear at higher density
962: due to their large masses.
963: %In fact, with our hadronic EOS
964: %$\sgm$ and $\la$ hyperons appear in charged matter
965: %(matter without charge-neutrality condition) at $\rho_B=1.15\;\rm fm^{-3}$.
966:
967: \begin{figure}[t]%............................................................
968: \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{ratio-unif.ps}
969: \caption{
970: (Color online)
971: Upper panel:
972: Particle fractions of neutral matter with electrons (corresponding to neutron star matter).
973: Lower panel:
974: The same quantity for charged matter without electrons,
975: the low-density part of which corresponds to symmetric nuclear matter.
976: %Both cases require beta-equilibrium condition.
977: Both cases require chemical-equilibrium condition.
978: }
979: \label{figRatioUnif}
980: \end{figure}%.................................................................
981:
982: Thus we conclude that
983: due to the relatively small magnitudes of the surface and Coulomb energies,
984: the EOS of the MP is similar to the MC one,
985: but the internal structure of the MP is very different.
986: In particular the role of hyperons is strongly reduced when we consider the
987: deconfinement transition in hyperonic matter.
988: Above a critical value of the surface tension parameter, however,
989: the MC is effectively recovered as the physical phase transition.
990: These results should be important for physical processes
991: like neutrino propagation and baryonic superfluidity,
992: besides the maximum mass problem, which will be discussed now.
993:
994:
995: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
996: \section{Hybrid star structure}
997: \label{s:ns}
998:
999: Knowing the EOS comprising hadronic, mixed, and quark phase
1000: in the form $P(\eps)$,
1001: the equilibrium configurations of static NS are obtained
1002: in the standard way
1003: by solving the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff (TOV) equations \cite{ns} for
1004: the pressure $P(r)$ and the enclosed mass $m(r)$,
1005: \begin{eqnarray}
1006: {dP\over dr} &=& -{ G m \epsilon \over r^2 } \,
1007: %\nonumber\\ && \times
1008: { \left( 1 + {P / \epsilon} \right)
1009: \left( 1 + {4\pi r^3 P / m} \right)
1010: \over
1011: 1 - {2G m/ r} } \:,\qquad
1012: \\
1013: {dm \over dr} &=& 4 \pi r^2 \epsilon \:,
1014: \end{eqnarray}
1015: being $G$ the gravitational constant.
1016: Starting with a central mass density $\epsilon(r=0) \equiv \epsilon_c$,
1017: one integrates out until the surface density equals the one of iron.
1018: This gives the stellar radius $R$ and its gravitational mass $M=m(R)$.
1019: For the description of the NS crust, we have joined
1020: the hadronic EOS with the ones by
1021: Negele and Vautherin \cite{nv} in the medium-density regime, and the ones
1022: by Feynman-Metropolis-Teller \cite{fey}
1023: and Baym-Pethick-Sutherland \cite{baym} for the outer crust.
1024:
1025:
1026: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1027: %\section{Results}
1028: \label{s:res}
1029:
1030: \begin{figure}[t]%............................................................
1031: \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{mr-M2-Sgm40.ps}
1032: \caption{
1033: (Color online)
1034: Neutron star mass-radius relations for different EOS
1035: and three different hadron-quark phase transition constructions.
1036: For the hybrid stars (blue and black curves),
1037: the dashed lines indicate the Maxwell (upper curves)
1038: or bulk Gibbs (lower curves) constructions
1039: and the solid lines
1040: the mixed phase by the full calculation.
1041: }
1042: \label{f:mr}
1043: \end{figure}%.................................................................
1044:
1045: \begin{figure*}[t]%...........................................................
1046: \includegraphics[width=0.98\textwidth]{nr41-M.ps}
1047: \caption{
1048: (Color online)
1049: Internal structure of a $1.4\,\ms$ neutron star
1050: obtained with three different phase transition constructions.
1051: The upper panels show total energy density and pressure
1052: and the lower panels the overall particle fractions as functions
1053: of the radial coordinate of the star,
1054: using the bulk Gibbs (left panel),
1055: the mixed phase by the full calculation (central panel),
1056: and the Maxwell construction (right panel).
1057: }
1058: \label{f:xr}
1059: \end{figure*}%................................................................
1060:
1061: Fig.~\ref{f:mr} compares the mass-radius relations obtained with the
1062: different models.
1063: The purely nucleonic EOS (green curve) yields a maximum NS mass
1064: of about $1.82\,\ms$, which is reduced to $1.32\,\ms$ when allowing
1065: for the presence of hyperons (red curve).
1066: This feature has been shown to be fairly independent of the nucleonic
1067: and hyperonic EOS that are used \cite{hypns2}.
1068: The canonical NS with mass of about $1.4\,\ms$
1069: can therefore not be purely hadronic stars in our approach.
1070: In fact, the inclusion of quark matter augments the maximum mass
1071: of hybrid stars to about $1.5\,\ms$.
1072:
1073: More precisely, we compare in the figure results obtained with the two quark EOS
1074: $\bc$ (blue curves) and $\beff$ (black curves), and involving the
1075: different phase transition constructions Bulk, Mixed, and Maxwell.
1076: In general, the Maxwell construction leads to a kink in the $M(R)$ relation,
1077: because the transition from a hadronic to a hybrid star occurs suddenly,
1078: involving a discontinuous increase of the central density when the quark
1079: phase starts in the core of the star.
1080: The Bulk construction yields smooth mass-radius relations
1081: involving a continuous transition from a hadronic to a hybrid star
1082: beginning at rather low central density corresponding to very low NS mass.
1083:
1084: The MP construction by the full calculation lies between the two extreme cases,
1085: and with our choice of $\sigma=40\;\rm MeV\!/fm^2$
1086: it is rather close to the Maxwell construction,
1087: smoothing out the kink of the hadron-hybrid star transition.
1088: This transition occurs generally at a fairly low NS mass,
1089: even below the natural minimum mass limit due to the
1090: formation via a protoneutron star \cite{proto}
1091: and is thus an unobservable feature.
1092:
1093: On the contrary, the maximum mass is hardly affected by the
1094: type of phase transition:
1095: For the $\beff$ model the maximum mass is $1.52\,\ms$,
1096: practically independent of the kind of phase transition,
1097: whereas for the $\bc$ model there is a slight variation of
1098: $M=1.45,1.45,1.50\,\ms$ for the Maxwell, mixed, and bulk construction,
1099: respectively.
1100:
1101: Whereas the maximum masses are practically independent of the phase
1102: transition construction, there are evidently large differences for the internal
1103: composition of the star.
1104: This is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{f:xr}, which shows the
1105: total energy density, pressure, and
1106: particle fractions as a function of the radial coordinate for a
1107: $1.4\,\ms$ NS.
1108: One observes with the bulk Gibbs construction (left panel)
1109: a coexistence of hadrons and quarks throughout the whole
1110: interior of the star,
1111: whereas with the MC (right panel)
1112: an abrupt transition involving a discontinuous
1113: jump of energy and baryon density occurs at a distance
1114: $r\approx7.4\;\rm km$ from the center of the star.
1115: The small contamination with $\sgm$ hyperons in the hadronic phase
1116: is not visible on the scale chosen.
1117: The MP with the full calculation (central panel) lies between the two extreme cases,
1118: %and the hadrons disappear gradually when
1119: hadrons and quarks coexisting in the range $r\approx5.7$ -- $8.0\;\rm km$.
1120: In both latter cases the pure quark matter core has a higher central pressure
1121: and baryon number and energy densities
1122: than the mixed core of the first case.
1123:
1124:
1125:
1126: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1127: \section{Summary and concluding remarks}
1128: \label{s:end}
1129:
1130: In this article we have studied the properties of the mixed phase
1131: in the quark deconfinement transition in hyperonic matter, and their
1132: influence on compact star structure.
1133: %the influence of different constructions
1134: %for the hadron-quark phase transition in beta-stable matter
1135: %on neutron star observables...
1136: The hyperonic EOS given by the BHF approach with realistic hadronic
1137: interactions is so soft that the transition density becomes
1138: very low if one uses the MIT bag model for the quark EOS.
1139:
1140: The hyperon-quark mixed phase was consistently treated with the
1141: basic thermodynamical requirement due to the Gibbs conditions.
1142: We have seen that the resultant EOS
1143: is little different from the one given by the Maxwell construction.
1144: This is because the finite-size effects, the surface tension,
1145: and the Coulomb interaction tend to diminish the available density region
1146: through the mechanical instability,
1147: as has also been suggested in previous articles \cite{vos,mixtat}.
1148: %but we have clearly shown it in this paper.
1149:
1150: For the bulk properties of compact stars, such as mass or radius,
1151: our EOS gives similar results as those given by the Maxwell construction.
1152: The maximum mass of a hybrid star is around $1.5\,M_\odot$, larger than
1153: that of the purely hyperonic star, $\approx1.3\,M_\odot$.
1154: Hence we may conclude that a hybrid star is still consistent with the
1155: canonical NS mass of $1.4\,M_\odot$,
1156: while the masses of purely hyperonic stars lie below it.
1157:
1158: On the other hand, the internal structure of the mixed phase is very
1159: different; e.g., the charge density as well as the baryon number density
1160: are nonuniform in the mixed phase.
1161: We have also seen that the hyperon number fraction
1162: is %completely
1163: suppressed in the mixed phase due to the relaxation
1164: of the charge-neutrality condition,
1165: while it is always finite in the Maxwell construction.
1166: This has important consequences for the elementary processes inside compact
1167: stars.
1168: For example, coherent scattering of neutrinos off lumps in the
1169: mixed phase may enhance the neutrino opacity \cite{red}.
1170: Also, the absence of hyperons prevents a fast cooling mechanism by way of
1171: the hyperon Urca processes \cite{pet}.
1172: These results directly modify the thermal evolution of compact stars.
1173:
1174: Although we have considered the phase transition at zero temperature,
1175: our study can be easily extended to finite temperature, which is
1176: relevant to protoneutron stars and supernovae.
1177:
1178: In this article we have not included hyperon-hyperon interactions
1179: and three-body forces among hyperons and nucleons, since there are still
1180: many theoretical and experimental ambiguities.
1181: However, some works have suggested their relevance for the maximum
1182: mass problem \cite{nis}:
1183: if the hadronic EOS is sufficiently stiffened by repulsive interactions,
1184: the maximum mass problem may be resolved.
1185: Even in this case, however, the quark deconfinement
1186: transition may occur and the properties of the mixed phase deserve
1187: further investigation.
1188:
1189: Finally, we have considered here a very simple quark matter model
1190: based on the MIT bag model, but there are many works about the properties of
1191: high-density QCD.
1192: Since color superconductivity \cite{alford} or magnetism \cite{tat}
1193: in quark matter are closely related to the thermal and magnetic evolutions
1194: of compact stars, it should be interesting to take into account these
1195: effects in the quark EOS for a more realistic description of the mixed phase.
1196: For example, one may expect 2SC in the quark phase, as inferred from
1197: Fig.~\ref{figProf}:
1198: the number densities of $u$ and $s$ quarks become similar in the
1199: mixed phase, while the quark densities are well different in the uniform
1200: quark matter \cite{alford,alf,alf2}.
1201: It would be an interesting possibility and worth studying in detail,
1202: but lies outside the scope of the present paper.
1203:
1204:
1205: %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1206: \section{Acknowledgments}
1207:
1208: We would like to acknowledge valuable discussions with
1209: T.~Takatsuka, R.~Tamagaki, S.~Nishizaki, and T.~Muto.
1210: T.~M.~is grateful to the Nuclear Theory Group and the RIKEN BNL Research Center
1211: at Brookhaven National Laboratory
1212: for their warm hospitality and fruitful discussions.
1213: This work is partially supported by the
1214: Grant-in-Aid for the 21st Century COE
1215: ``Center for the Diversity and Universality in Physics''
1216: and the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research Fund (C)
1217: of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan
1218: (13640282, 16540246).
1219:
1220:
1221: %--------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|
1222: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1223:
1224: \bibitem{ns}
1225: %
1226: S. L. Shapiro and S. A. Teukolsky,
1227: {\it Black Holes, White Dwarfs and Neutron Stars}
1228: (Wiley, New York, 1983).
1229:
1230: \bibitem{nshyp}
1231: % PHASES OF DENSE MATTER IN NEUTRON STARS
1232: H. Heiselberg and M. Hjorth-Jensen,
1233: Phys. Rep. {\bf 328}, 237 (2000).
1234:
1235: \bibitem{gle}
1236: %
1237: N. K. Glendenning,
1238: {\it Compact Stars: Nuclear Physics, Particle Physics and General Relativity},
1239: 2nd ed. (Springer, Berlin, 2000);
1240: F. Weber,
1241: {\it Pulsars as Astrophysical Laboratories for Nuclear and Particle Physics}
1242: (IOP Publishing, Bristol, 1999).
1243:
1244: \bibitem{glenhyp}
1245: N. K. Glendenning,
1246: % THE HYPERON COMPOSITION OF NEUTRON STARS
1247: Phys. Lett. {\bf B114}, 392 (1982);
1248: % NEUTRON STARS ARE GIANT HYPERNUCLEI?
1249: Astrophys. J. {\bf 293}, 470 (1985).
1250: %% VACUUM POLARIZATION EFFECTS ON NUCLEAR MATTER AND NEUTRON STARS
1251: % Nucl. Phys. {\bf A493}, 521 (1989);
1252:
1253: \bibitem{nsmass}
1254: For a recent review, see
1255: % DENSE MATTER IN COMPACT STARS:
1256: % THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND OBSERVATIONAL CONSTRAINTS
1257: D. Page and S. Reddy,
1258: Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. {\bf 56}, 327 (2006).
1259:
1260: \bibitem{hypns}
1261: % ONSET OF HYPERON FORMATION IN NEUTRON STAR MATTER FROM BRUECKNER THEORY
1262: M. Baldo, G. F. Burgio, and H.-J. Schulze,
1263: Phys. Rev. {\bf C58}, 3688 (1998);
1264: % HYPERON STARS IN THE BRUECKNER-BETHE-GOLDSTONE THEORY
1265: % M. Baldo, G. F. Burgio, and H.-J. Schulze,
1266: Phys. Rev. {\bf C61}, 055801 (2000).
1267: \bibitem{hypns2}
1268: % MAXIMUM MASS OF NEUTRON STARS
1269: H.-J. Schulze, A. Polls, A. Ramos, and I. Vida\a~na,
1270: Phys. Rev. {\bf C73}, 058801 (2006).
1271: %% HYPERON-HYPERON INTERACTIONS AND PROPERTIES OF NEUTRON STAR MATTER (???WRONG)
1272: % I. Vida\a~na, A. Polls, A. Ramos, L. Engvik, and M. Hjorth-Jensen,
1273: % Phys. Rev. {\bf C62}, 035801 (2000).
1274:
1275: \bibitem{mit}
1276: %% MAXIMUM MASS OF NEUTRON STARS WITH A QUARK CORE
1277: % G. F. Burgio, M. Baldo, P. K. Sahu, A. B. Santra, and H.-J. Schulze
1278: % Phys. Lett. {\bf B526}, 19 (2002);
1279: % HADRON-QUARK PHASE TRANSITION IN DENSE MATTER AND NEUTRON STARS
1280: G. F. Burgio, M. Baldo, P. K. Sahu, and H.-J. Schulze,
1281: Phys. Rev. {\bf C66}, 025802 (2002).
1282: \bibitem{njl}
1283: % NEUTRON STARS AND THE TRANSITION TO COLOR SUPERCONDUCTING QUARK MATTER
1284: M. Baldo, M. Buballa, G. F. Burgio, F. Neumann, M. Oertel, and H.-J. Schulze,
1285: Phys. Lett. {\bf B562}, 153 (2003).
1286: \bibitem{cdm}
1287: % HYBRID STARS WITH THE COLOR DIELECTRIC AND THE MIT BAG MODELS
1288: C. Maieron, M. Baldo, G. F. Burgio, and H.-J. Schulze,
1289: Phys. Rev. {\bf D70}, 043010 (2004).
1290: \bibitem{njlc}
1291: % QUARK MATTER IN NEUTRON STARS WITHIN THE NAMBU-JONA-LASINIO MODEL
1292: % AND CONFINEMENT
1293: M. Baldo, G. F. Burgio, P. Castorina, S. Plumari, and D. Zappal\`a,
1294: Phys. Rev. {\bf C75}, 035804 (2007).
1295:
1296: \bibitem{glen}
1297: % FIRST-ORDER PHASE TRANSITIONS WITH MORE THAN ONE CONSERVED CHARGE:
1298: % CONSEQUENCES FOR NEUTRON STARS
1299: N. K. Glendenning,
1300: Phys. Rev. {\bf D46}, 1274 (1992);
1301: % PHASE TRANSITIONS AND CRYSTALLINE STRUCTURES IN NEUTRON STAR CORES
1302: Phys. Rep. {\bf 342}, 393 (2001).
1303:
1304: \bibitem{mixmaru}
1305: % NUCLEAR "PASTA" STRUCTURES AND THE CHARGE SCREENING EFFECT
1306: T. Maruyama, T. Tatsumi, D. N. Voskresensky, T. Tanigawa, and S. Chiba,
1307: Phys. Rev. {\bf C72}, 015802 (2005);
1308: % FINITE SIZE EFFECTS ON KAONIC "PASTA" STRUCTURES
1309: T. Maruyama, T. Tatsumi, D. N. Voskresensky, T. Tanigawa, T. Endo, and S. Chiba,
1310: Phys. Rev. {\bf C73}, 035802 (2006).
1311:
1312: \bibitem{mixmarurev}
1313: % REVIEW OF PASTA STRUCTURES
1314: T. Maruyama, T. Tatsumi, T. Endo, and S. Chiba,
1315: Recent Res. Devel. in Physics, {\bf 7}, 1 (2006).
1316:
1317: \bibitem{chr}
1318: % FIRST ORDER KAON CONDENSATE
1319: N. K. Glendenning and J. Schaffner-Bielich,
1320: Phys. Rev. {\bf C60}, 025803 (1999);
1321: % SURFACE TENSION BETWEEN A KAON CONDENSATE AND THE NORMAL NUCLEAR MATTER PHASE
1322: M. Christiansen, N. K. Glendenning, and J. Schaffner-Bielich,
1323: Phys. Rev. {\bf C62}, 025804 (2000).
1324:
1325: \bibitem{nor}
1326: % FIRST ORDER KAON CONDENSATION IN NEUTRON STARS:
1327: % FINITE SIZE EFFECTS IN THE MIXED PHASE
1328: T. Norsen and S. Reddy,
1329: Phys. Rev. {\bf C63}, 065804 (2001).
1330:
1331: \bibitem{mix}
1332: % QUARK MATTER DROPLETS IN NEUTRON STARS
1333: H. Heiselberg, C. J. Pethick, and E. F. Staubo,
1334: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 70}, 1355 (1993);
1335: % SCREENING IN QUARK DROPLETS
1336: H. Heiselberg,
1337: Phys. Rev. {\bf D48}, 1418 (1993);
1338: % CRYSTALLINE STRUCTURE OF THE MIXED CONFINED-DECONFINED PHASE IN NEUTRON STARS
1339: N. K. Glendenning and S. Pei,
1340: Phys. Rev. {\bf C52}, 2250 (1995);
1341: % FINITE SIZE EFFECTS AND THE MIXED QUARK-HADRON PHASE IN NEUTRON STARS
1342: M. B. Christiansen and N. K. Glendenning,
1343: Phys. Rev. {\bf C56}, 2858 (1997);
1344: % PHASE TRANSITIONS AND CRYSTALLINE STRUCTURES IN NEUTRON STAR CORES
1345: N. K. Glendenning,
1346: Phys. Rep. {\bf 342}, 393 (2001).
1347:
1348: \bibitem{vos}
1349: % CHARGE SCREENING IN HADRON-QUARK MIXED PHASE
1350: D. N. Voskresensky, M. Yasuhira, and T. Tatsumi,
1351: Phys. Lett. {\bf B541}, 93 (2002);
1352: % CHARGE SCREENING AT FIRST ORDER PHASE TRANSITIONS AND HADRON-QUARK MIXED PHASE
1353: D. N. Voskresensky, M. Yasuhira, and T. Tatsumi,
1354: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A723}, 291 (2003).
1355:
1356: \bibitem{mixtat}
1357: % HADRON-QUARK MIXED PHASE IN NEUTRON STARS
1358: T. Tatsumi, M. Yasuhira, and D. N. Voskresensky,
1359: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A718}, 359 (2003);
1360: % NUMERICAL STUDY OF THE HADRON-QUARK MIXED PHASE
1361: T. Endo, T. Maruyama, S. Chiba, and T. Tatsumi,
1362: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A749}, 333 (2005);
1363: % CHARGE SCREENING EFFECT IN THE HADRON-QUARK MIXED PHASE
1364: T. Endo, T. Maruyama, S. Chiba, and T. Tatsumi,
1365: Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf 115} No. 2, 337 (2006).
1366:
1367: \bibitem{let}
1368: % QUARK DECONFINEMENT TRANSITION IN HYPERONIC MATTER
1369: T. Maruyama, S. Chiba, H.-J. Schulze, and T. Tatsumi,
1370: submitted to Phys. Lett.,
1371: nucl-th/0702088.
1372:
1373: \bibitem{bhf}
1374: % THE MANY-BODY THEORY OF THE NUCLEAR EQUATION OF STATE
1375: M. Baldo, {\em Nuclear Methods and the Nuclear Equation of State}
1376: (World Scientific, Singapore, 1999).
1377:
1378: \bibitem{thl}
1379: % BETHE-BRUECKNER-GOLDSTONE EXPANSION IN NUCLEAR MATTER
1380: H. Q. Song, M. Baldo, G. Giansiracusa, and U. Lombardo,
1381: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 81}, 1584 (1998);
1382: % BETHE-BRUECKNER-GOLDSTONE EXPANSION IN NEUTRON MATTER
1383: M. Baldo, G. Giansiracusa, U. Lombardo, and H. Q. Song,
1384: Phys. Lett. {\bf B473}, 1 (2000);
1385: % HIGH DENSITY SYMMETRIC NUCLEAR MATTER IN THE BBG APPROACH
1386: M. Baldo, A. Fiasconaro, H. Q. Song, G. Giansiracusa, and U. Lombardo,
1387: Phys. Rev. {\bf C65}, 017303 (2002);
1388: % SOLUTION TO THE BETHE-FADDEEV EQUATION WITHIN THE CONTINUOUS VERSION
1389: % OF THE HOLE-LINE EXPANSION
1390: R. Sartor,
1391: Phys. Rev. {\bf C73}, 034307 (2006).
1392:
1393: \bibitem{hypmat}
1394: % HYPERNUCLEAR MATTER IN THE BRUECKNER-HARTREE-FOCK APPROXIMATION
1395: H.-J. Schulze, A. Lejeune, J. Cugnon, M. Baldo, and U. Lombardo,
1396: Phys. Lett. {\bf B355}, 21 (1995);
1397: % HYPERONIC NUCLEAR MATTER IN BRUECKNER THEORY
1398: H.-J. Schulze, M. Baldo, U. Lombardo, J. Cugnon, and A. Lejeune,
1399: Phys. Rev. {\bf C57}, 704 (1998).
1400:
1401: \bibitem{vi00}
1402: % STRANGE NUCLEAR MATTER WITHIN BHF THEORY (GAP CHOICE)
1403: I. Vida\~na, A. Polls, A. Ramos, M. Hjorth-Jensen, and V. G. J. Stoks,
1404: Phys. Rev. {\bf C61}, 025802 (2000).
1405:
1406: \bibitem{v18}
1407: % ACCURATE NUCLEON-NUCLEON POTENTIAL WITH CHARGE-INDEPENDENCE BREAKING
1408: R. B. Wiringa, V. G. J. Stoks, and R. Schiavilla,
1409: Phys. Rev. {\bf C51}, 38 (1995).
1410:
1411: \bibitem{uix}
1412: %% QUANTUM MONTE-CARLO CALCULATIONS OF A<=6 NUCLEI
1413: % B. S. Pudliner, V. R. Pandharipande, J. Carlson, and R. B. Wiringa,
1414: % Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 74}, 4396 (1995);
1415: % QUANTUM MONTE CARLO CALCULATIONS FOR NUCLEI WITH A<=7
1416: B. S. Pudliner, V. R. Pandharipande, J. Carlson, S. C. Pieper,
1417: and R. B. Wiringa,
1418: Phys. Rev. {\bf C56}, 1720 (1997);
1419: % MICROSCOPIC NUCLEAR EQUATION OF STATE WITH THREE-BODY FORCES AND
1420: % NEUTRON STAR STRUCTURE
1421: M. Baldo, I. Bombaci, and G. F. Burgio,
1422: Astron. Astroph. {\bf 328}, 274 (1997);
1423: % NUCLEAR LIQUID-GAS PHASE TRANSITION
1424: M. Baldo and L. S. Ferreira,
1425: Phys. Rev. {\bf C59}, 682 (1999);
1426: % THREE-BODY FORCES AND NEUTRON STAR STRUCTURE
1427: X. R. Zhou, G. F. Burgio, U. Lombardo, H.-J. Schulze, and W. Zuo,
1428: Phys. Rev. {\bf 69}, 018801 (2004).
1429:
1430: %% THREE-NUCLEON INTERACTION IN 3-, 4- AND INFINITE-BODY SYSTEMS
1431: % J. Carlson, V. R. Pandharipande, and R. B. Wiringa,
1432: % Nucl. Phys. {\bf A401}, 59 (1983);
1433: %% MOMENTUM DISTRIBUTIONS IN A = 3 AND 4 NUCLEI
1434: % R. Schiavilla, V. R. Pandharipande, and R. B. Wiringa,
1435: % Nucl. Phys. {\bf A449}, 219 (1986).
1436:
1437: \bibitem{nsc89}
1438: % SOFT-CORE BARYON-BARYON ONE-BOSON-EXCHANGE MODELS.
1439: % II. HYPERON-NUCLEON POTENTIAL
1440: P. M. M. Maessen, Th. A. Rijken, and J. J. de Swart,
1441: Phys. Rev. {\bf C40}, 2226 (1989).
1442:
1443: \bibitem{yamamoto}
1444: % SOFT-CORE HYPERON-NUCLEON POTENTIALS
1445: Th. A. Rijken, V. G. J. Stoks, and Y. Yamamoto,
1446: Phys. Rev. {\bf C59}, 21 (1999).
1447:
1448: \bibitem{vprs01}
1449: % HYPERNUCLEI IN THE SHF FORMALISM WITH A MICROSCOPIC HYPERON-NUCLEON FORCE
1450: J. Cugnon, A. Lejeune, and H.-J. Schulze,
1451: Phys. Rev. {\bf C62}, 064308 (2000);
1452: % HYPERNUCLEAR STRUCTURE WITH THE NEW NIJMEGEN POTENTIALS
1453: I. Vida\~na, A. Polls, A. Ramos, and H.-J. Schulze,
1454: Phys. Rev. {\bf 64}, 044301 (2001).
1455:
1456: \bibitem{nsc97}
1457: % SOFT-CORE BARYON-BARYON POTENTIALS FOR THE COMPLETE BARYON OCTET
1458: V. G. J. Stoks and Th. A. Rijken,
1459: Phys. Rev. {\bf C59}, 3009 (1999).
1460:
1461: \bibitem{chodos}
1462: % NEW EXTENDED MODEL OF HADRONS
1463: A. Chodos, R. F. Jaffe, K. Johnson, C. B. Thorn, and V. F. Weisskopf,
1464: Phys. Rev. {\bf D9}, 3471 (1974).
1465:
1466: \bibitem{quark}
1467: % COSMIC SEPARATION OF PHASES
1468: E. Witten,
1469: Phys. Rev. {\bf D30}, 272 (1984);
1470: % IS CYGNUS X-3 STRANGE?
1471: G. Baym, E. W. Kolb, L. McLerran, T. P. Walker, and R. L. Jaffe,
1472: Phys. Lett. {\bf B160}, 181 (1985);
1473: % FAST PULSARS, STRANGE STARS: AN OPPORTUNITY IN RADIO ASTRONOMY
1474: N. K. Glendenning,
1475: Mod. Phys. Lett. {\bf A5}, 2197 (1990).
1476:
1477: \bibitem{jaf}
1478: % STRANGE MATTER
1479: E. Farhi and R. L. Jaffe,
1480: Phys. Rev. {\bf D30}, 2379 (1984);
1481: % RADIOACTIVITY IN STRANGE QUARK MATTER
1482: M. S. Berger and R. L. Jaffe,
1483: Phys. Rev. {\bf C35}, 213 (1987).
1484:
1485: \bibitem{alford}
1486: % COMPACT STARS WITH COLOR SUPERCONDUCTING QUARK MATTER
1487: M. Alford and S. Reddy,
1488: Phys. Rev. {\bf D67}, 074024 (2003);
1489: % HYBRID STARS THAT MASQUERADE AS NEUTRON STARS
1490: M. Alford, M. Braby, M. Paris, and S. Reddy,
1491: Astrophys. J. {\bf 629}, 969 (2005).
1492: % nucl-th/0411016.
1493:
1494: \bibitem{latt}
1495: % TENSION OF THE INTERFACE BETWEEN TWO ORDERED PHASES
1496: % IN LATTICE SU(3) GAUGE THEORY
1497: K. Kajantie, L. K\"ark\"ainen, and K. Rummukainen,
1498: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B357}, 693 (1991);
1499: % SURFACE TENSION IN FINITE-TEMPERATURE QUANTUM CHROMODYNAMICS
1500: S. Huang, J. Potvion, C. Rebbi, and S. Sanielevici,
1501: Phys. Rev. {\bf D42}, 2864 (1990); {\bf D43}, 2056 (1991).
1502:
1503: \bibitem{red}
1504: % FIRST ORDER PHASE TRANSITIONS IN NEUTRON STAR MATTER:
1505: % DROPLETS AND COHERENT NEUTRINO SCATTERING
1506: S. Reddy, G. Bertsch, and M. Prakash,
1507: Phys. Lett. {\bf B475}, 1 (2000).
1508:
1509: \bibitem{hei}
1510: % SCREENING IN QUARK DROPLETS
1511: H. Heiselberg,
1512: Phys. Rev. {\bf D48}, 1418 (1993);
1513: % STRANGE STAR SURFACE: A CRUST WITH NUGGETS
1514: P. Jaikumar, S. Reddy, and A. W. Steiner,
1515: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 96}, 041101 (2006);
1516: % STABILITY OF STRANGE STAR CRUSTS AND STRANGELETS
1517: M. G. Alford, K. Rajagopal, S. Reddy, and A. W. Steiner,
1518: Phys. Rev. {\bf D73}, 114016 (2006).
1519:
1520: \bibitem{rav}
1521: % STRUCTURE OF MATTER BELOW NUCLEAR SATURATION DENSITY
1522: D. G. Ravenhall, C. J. Pethick, and J. R. Wilson,
1523: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 50}, 2066 (1983).
1524:
1525: \bibitem{nv}
1526: % NEUTRON STAR MATTER AT SUB-NUCLEAR DENSITIES
1527: J. W. Negele and D. Vautherin,
1528: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A207}, 298 (1973).
1529: \bibitem{fey}
1530: % EQUATIONS OF STATE OF ELEMENTS BASED ON THE GENERALIZED FERMI-THOMAS THEORY
1531: R. P. Feynman, N. Metropolis, and E. Teller,
1532: Phys. Rev. {\bf 75}, 1561 (1949).
1533: \bibitem{baym}
1534: % THE GROUND STATE OF MATTER AT HIGH DENSITIES:
1535: % EQUATION OF STATE AND STELLAR MODELS
1536: G. Baym, C. Pethick, and P. Sutherland,
1537: Astrophys. J. {\bf 170}, 299 (1971).
1538:
1539: \bibitem{proto}
1540: % PROTONEUTRON STARS WITHIN THE BRUECKNER-BETHE-GOLDSTONE THEORY
1541: O. E. Nicotra, M. Baldo, G. F. Burgio, and H.-J. Schulze,
1542: Astron. Astrophys. {\bf 451}, 213 (2006);
1543: % HYBRID PROTONEUTRON STARS WITH THE MIT BAG MODEL
1544: Phys. Rev. {\bf D74}, 123001 (2006).
1545:
1546: \bibitem{pet}
1547: % RAPID COOLING OF NEUTRON STARS BY HYPERONS AND DELTA ISOBAR
1548: M. Prakash, M. Prakash, J. M. Lattimer, and C. J. Pethick,
1549: Astrophys. J. {\bf 390}, L77 (1992);
1550: % NEUTRINO INTERACTIONS IN OCTET BARYON MATTER
1551: T. Tatsumi, T. Takatsuka, and R. Tamagaki,
1552: Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf 110}, 179 (2003);
1553: %
1554: T. Takatsuka, S. Nishizaki, Y. Yamamoto, and R. Tamagaki,
1555: Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf 115}, in press (2007).
1556:
1557: \bibitem{nis}
1558: S. Nishizaki, Y. Yamamoto, and T. Takatsuka,
1559: % EFFECTIVE YN AND YY INTERACTIONS AND HYPERON-MIXING IN NEUTRON STAR MATTER -
1560: % Y = LAMBDA CASE
1561: Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf 105}, 607 (2001);
1562: % HYPERON-MIXED NEUTRON STAR MATTER AND NEUTRON STARS
1563: {\bf 108}, 703 (2002).
1564:
1565: \bibitem{tat}
1566: % FERROMAGNETISM OF QUARK LIQUID
1567: T. Tatsumi,
1568: Phys. Lett. {\bf B489}, 280 (2000);
1569: % MAGNETISM AND SUPERCONDUCTIVITY IN QUARK MATTER
1570: T. Tatsumi, E. Nakano, and K. Nawa,
1571: {\em Dark Matter: New Research}, edited by J. Val Blain
1572: (Nova Science Publishers, New York, 2006), p.39.
1573:
1574: \bibitem{alf}
1575: % ABSENCE OF TWO-FLAVOR COLOR-SUPERCONDUCTIVITY IN COMPACT STARS
1576: M. Alford and K. Rajagopal,
1577: J. High Energy Phys. {\bf 06}, 031 (2002);
1578: % THE CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS OF QCD
1579: K. Rajagopal and F. Wilczek,
1580: %Festschrift in honor of B. L. Ioffe,
1581: {\em At the Frontier of Particle Physics / Handbook of QCD},
1582: edited by M. Shifman
1583: (World Scientific, Singapore, 2001),
1584: hep-ph/0011333.
1585:
1586: \bibitem{alf2}
1587: % STABILITY OF STRANGE STAR CRUSTS AND STRANGELETS
1588: M. Alford, K. Rajagopal, S. Reddy, and A. W. Steiner,
1589: Phys. Rev. {\bf D73}, 114016 (2006).
1590:
1591: \end{thebibliography}
1592:
1593: \end{document}
1594: %--------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|
1595:
1596:
1597: