1: 

2: 

3: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}

4: 

5: \shorttitle{Non-spherical quasi-relaxed stellar systems}

6: \shortauthors{Bertin and Varri}

7: 

8: \bibpunct[; ]{(}{)}{;}{a}{}{;}

9: 

10: \begin{document}

11: 

12: \title{The construction of non-spherical models of quasi-relaxed stellar systems}

13: 

14: \author{G. Bertin and A.L. Varri}

15: \affil{Universit\`{a} degli Studi di Milano, Dipartimento di Fisica, via Celoria 16, I-20133 Milano, Italy; anna.varri@studenti.unimi.it}

16: 

17: 

18: 

19: \begin{abstract}

20: 

21: Spherical models of collisionless but quasi-relaxed stellar systems 

22: have long been studied as a natural framework for the description of 

23: globular clusters. Here we consider the construction of self-consistent 

24: models under the same physical conditions, but including explicitly 

25: the ingredients that lead to departures from spherical symmetry.

26: In particular, we focus on the effects of the tidal field associated 

27: with the hosting galaxy. We then take a stellar system on a circular 

28: orbit inside a galaxy represented as a ``frozen" external field. The 

29: equilibrium distribution function is obtained from the one describing 

30: the spherical case by replacing the energy integral with the relevant 

31: Jacobi integral in the presence of the external tidal field. Then the 

32: construction of the model requires the investigation of a singular 

33: perturbation problem for an elliptic partial differential equation with 

34: a free boundary, for which we provide a method of solution to any desired

35: order, with explicit solutions to two orders. We outline the relevant 

36: parameter space, thus opening the way to a systematic study of the

37: properties of a two-parameter family of physically justified

38: non-spherical models of quasi-relaxed stellar systems. The general

39: method developed here can also be used to construct models for which 

40: the non-spherical shape is due to internal rotation. Eventually, the 

41: models will be a useful tool to investigate whether the shapes of

42: globular clusters are primarily determined by internal rotation,

43: by external tides, or by pressure anisotropy.

44: 

45: \end{abstract}

46: 

47: \keywords{globular clusters: general --- methods: analytical --- stellar dynamics}

48: 

49: \section{Introduction}

50: 

51: Large stellar systems can be studied as collisionless systems, by

52: means of a one-star distribution function obeying the combined set

53: of the collisionless Boltzmann equation and the Poisson equation,

54: under the action of the self-consistent mean potential. For elliptical 

55: galaxies the relevant two-star relaxation times do actually exceed 

56: their age; an imprint of partial relaxation may be left at the time 

57: of their formation \citetext{if we refer to a picture of formation 

58: via incomplete violent relaxation; \citealp{Lyn67}, \citealp{Alb82}}, 

59: but otherwise they should be thought of as truly collisionless systems, 

60: generally characterized by an anisotropic pressure tensor. In turn, 

61: for globular clusters the relevant relaxation times are typically 

62: shorter than their age, so that we may argue that for many of them 

63: the two-star relaxation processes have had enough time to act and 

64: to bring them close to a thermodynamically relaxed state, with their 

65: distribution function close to a Maxwellian. This line of arguments 

66: has led to the development of well-known dynamical models for globular 

67: clusters \citep{Kin65,Kin66}.

68: 

69: King models are based on a quasi-Maxwellian isotropic distribution

70: function $f_K(E)$ in which a truncation prescription, continuous

71: in phase space, is set heuristically to incorporate the presence

72: of external tides; but otherwise, they are fully self-consistent

73: (i.e., no external fields are actually considered) and perfectly

74: spherical. Empirically, the simplification of spherical symmetry

75: is encouraged by the fact that in general globular clusters have

76: round appearance. Indeed, as a zero-th order description, these

77: models have had remarkable success in applications to observed

78: globular clusters \citep[e.g., see][and references therein]{Spi87,

79: DjoMey94,McLMar05}.

80: In recent years, great progress has been made in the acquisition of

81: detailed quantitative information about the structure of these stellar

82: systems, especially in relation to the measurement of the proper

83: motions of thousands of individual stars \citep[see][]{Lee00,McL06}, 

84: with the possibility of getting a direct

85: 5-dimensional view of their phase space. Such progress calls for

86: renewed efforts on the side of modeling. More general models would

87: allow us to address the issue of the origin of the observed

88: departures from spherical symmetry. In fact, it remains to be

89: established which physical ingredient among rotation, pressure

90: anisotropy, and tides is the primary cause of the flattening of

91: globular clusters \citep[e.g., see][and references therein]{Kin61,

92: FreFal82,Gey83,WhiSha87,DavPru90,HanRyd94,Ryd96,Goo97,Ber08} 

93: 

94: As in the case of the study of elliptical galaxies \citep[e.g., see]

95: [and references therein]{BerSti93}, different approaches can be 

96: taken to the construction of models.

97: Broadly speaking, two complementary paths can be followed. In the

98: first, ``descriptive" approach, under suitable geometrical (on the

99: intrinsic shape) and dynamical (e.g., on the absence or presence

100: of dark matter) hypotheses, the available data for an individual

101: stellar system are imposed as constraints to derive the internal

102: orbital structure (distribution function) most likely to

103: correspond to the observations. This approach is often carried out

104: in terms of codes that generalize a method introduced by

105: \citet{Sch79}; for an application to the globular cluster

106: $\omega$ Cen, see \citet{Ven06}. In the second, ``predictive" 

107: approach, one proposes a formation/evolution scenario in order to 

108: identify a physically justified distribution function for a wide 

109: class of objects, and then proceeds to investigate, by comparison 

110: with observations of several individual objects, whether the data 

111: support the general physical picture that has been proposed. Indeed, 

112: King models belong to this latter approach.

113: 

114: The purpose of this paper is to extend the description of

115: quasi-relaxed stellar systems, so far basically limited to the

116: spherical King models, to the non-spherical case. There are at

117: least three different ways of extending spherical isotropic models

118: of quasi-relaxed stellar systems (such as King models), by

119: modifying the distribution function so as to include: (i) the

120: explicit presence of a non-spherical tidal field; (ii) the

121: presence of internal rotation; (iii) the presence of some pressure

122: anisotropy. As noted earlier in this Introduction, these

123: correspond to the physical ingredients that, separately, may be

124: thought to be at the origin of the observed non-spherical shapes.

125: We will thus focus on the construction of physically justified

126: models, as an extension of the King models, in the presence of

127: external tides and, briefly, on the extension of the models to the

128: presence of rigid internal rotation. A first-order analysis of the

129: triaxial tidal problem addressed in this paper was carried out by

130: \citet{HegRam95} and the effect of a ``frozen'' tidal field on 

131: (initially) spherical King models was studied by \citet{Wei93} 

132: using N-body simulations. 

133: For the axisymmetric problem associated with the presence of internal 

134: rotation, a first-order analysis of a simply truncated Maxwellian 

135: distribution perturbed by a rigid rotation was given by \citet{KorAna71}; 

136: different models where differential rotation is considered were 

137: proposed by \citet{PreTom70} and by \citet{Wil75}, also in view of

138: extensions to the presence of pressure anisotropy, which goes beyond

139: the scope of this paper. Models that represent a direct generalization

140: of the King family to the case with differential rotation have also 

141: been examined, with particular attention to their thermodynamic 

142: properties \citep{LagLon96,LonLag96}. In principle, the method of 

143: solution that we will present below can deal with the extension of 

144: other spherical isotropic models with finite size that are not 

145: of the King form \citetext{e.g., see \citealp{WooDic62,Dav77}; 

146: see also the interesting suggestion by \citealp{Mad96}}.

147: 

148: The study of self-consistent collisionless equilibrium models has

149: a long tradition not only in stellar dynamics, but also in plasma

150: physics \citep[e.g., see][]{Har62,AttPeg99}. We note

151: that in both research areas a study in the presence of external

152: fields, especially when the external field is bound to break the

153: natural symmetry associated with the one-component problem, is

154: only rarely considered.

155: 

156: The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the

157: reference physical model, in which a globular cluster is imagined

158: to move on a circular orbit inside a host galaxy treated as a

159: frozen background field; the modified distribution function for

160: such a cluster is then identified and the relevant parameter space

161: defined. In Sect.~3 we set the mathematical problem associated

162: with the construction of the related self-consistent models. For

163: models generated by the spherical $f_K(E)$, Sect.~4 and Appendix 

164: A give the complete solution in terms of matched asymptotic 

165: expansions. Alternative methods of solutions are briefly discussed 

166: in Sect.~5. The concluding Section 6 gives a summary of the paper, 

167: with a short discussion of the results obtained. In Appendix B we 

168: show how the method developed in this paper can be applied to 

169: construct quasi-relaxed models flattened by rotation in the absence 

170: of external tides. In Appendix C we show how the method can be 

171: applied to other isotropic truncated models, different from King 

172: models. 

173: 

174: Technically, the mathematical problem of a singular perturbation 

175: with a free boundary that is faced here is very similar to the 

176: problem noted in the theory of rotating stars, starting with Milne 

177: \citep[see][]{Tas78,Mil23,Cha33,Kro42,ChaLeb62,MonRox65}. The 

178: problem was initially dealt with inadequate tools; a satisfactory 

179: solution of the singular perturbation problem was obtained only 

180: later, by \citet{Smi75,Smi76}.

181: 

182: \section{The physical model}

183: 

184: \subsection{The tidal potential}

185: 

186: As a reference case, we consider an idealized model in which the

187: center of mass of a globular cluster is imagined to move on a

188: circular orbit of radius $R_0$, characterized by orbital frequency

189: $\Omega$, inside a host galaxy. For simplicity, we focus on the

190: motion of the stars inside the globular cluster and model the

191: galaxy, taken to have very large mass, by means of a {\it frozen}

192: gravitational field (which we will call the galactic field,

193: described by the potential $\Phi_G$), with a given overall

194: symmetry. This choice makes us ignore interesting effects that are

195: generally present in the full interaction between a ``satellite"

196: and a galaxy; in a sense, we are taking a complementary view of an

197: extremely complex dynamical situation, with respect to other

198: investigations, such as those that lead to a discussion of the

199: mechanism of dynamical friction \citetext{in which the globular 

200: cluster or satellite is modeled as a rigid body and the stars of 

201: the galaxy are taken as the ``live" component; see \citealp{BonAlb87}; 

202: \citealp{Ber03}; \citealp{AreBer07}; and references therein}. 

203: Therefore, we will be initially following the picture of a 

204: {\it restricted three-body problem}, with one important

205: difference, that the ``secondary" is not treated as a point mass

206: but as a ``live" stellar system, described by the cluster

207: mean-field potential $\Phi_C$. In this extremely simple orbital

208: choice for the cluster center of mass, in the corotating frame the

209: associated tidal field is time-independent and so we can proceed

210: to the construction of a stationary dynamical model.

211: 

212: We consider the galactic potential $\Phi_G$ to be spherically

213: symmetric, i.e. $\Phi_G = \Phi_G (R)$, with $R= \sqrt{X^2

214: +Y^2+Z^2}$, in terms of a standard set of Cartesian coordinates

215: $(X,Y,Z)$, so that $\Omega^2 = (d\Phi_G (R)/dR)_{R_0}/R_0$. Let

216: $(X,Y)$ be the orbit plane of the center of mass of the cluster.

217: We then introduce a local rotating frame of reference, so that the

218: position vector is given by ${\bf r}=(x,y,z)$, with origin in the

219: center of mass of the cluster and for which the x-axis points away

220: from the center of the galactic field, the y-axis follows the

221: direction of the cluster rotation in its orbit around the galaxy,

222: and the z-axis is perpendicular to the orbit plane (according to

223: the right-hand rule). In such rotating local frame, the relevant

224: Lagrangian, describing the motion of a star belonging to the

225: cluster, is \citetext{cf. \citealp{Cha42}, Eq.~[5.510]}:

226: \begin{equation}\label{lagran}

227: \mathcal{L}=\frac{1}{2}\{\dot{x}^2+\dot{y}^2+\dot{z}^2 +\Omega^2[(R_0+x)^2+y^2]

228: +2\Omega(R_0+x)\dot{y}-2\Omega\dot{x}y\}-\Phi_G(R)-\Phi_C(x,y,z)~,

229: \end{equation}

230: where $R =\sqrt{(R_0+x)^2+y^2+z^2}$ and the terms responsible for 

231: centrifugal and Coriolis forces are explicitly displayed.

232: 

233: If we suppose that the size of the cluster is small compared to

234: $R_0$, we can adequately represent the galactic field by its

235: linear approximation with respect to the local coordinates (the

236: so-called ``tidal approximation"). The corresponding equations of

237: the motion for a single star in the rotating local frame are:

238: \begin{eqnarray}

239: &&\displaystyle\ddot{x}-2\Omega \dot{y}-(4\Omega^2-\kappa^2)x=

240: -\frac{\partial \Phi_C}{\partial x}~, \label{eqmotion1} \\

241: &&\displaystyle\ddot{y}+2\Omega \dot{x}=-\frac{\partial

242: \Phi_C}{\partial y}~, \label{eqmotion2} \\

243: &&\displaystyle\ddot{z}+\Omega^2z=-\frac{\partial \Phi_C}{\partial z}~,\label{eqmotion3}

244: \end{eqnarray}

245: where $\kappa$ is the epicyclic frequency at $R_0$, given by 

246: $\kappa^2 = 3\Omega^2 + (d^2\Phi_G/dR^2)_{R_0}$. Note that the 

247: assumed symmetry for $\Phi_G$ introduces a cancellation between the 

248: kinematic term $y \Omega^2$ and the gradient of the galactic 

249: potential $\partial \Phi_G/ \partial y$ and makes the vertical 

250: acceleration $ - \partial \Phi_G/ \partial z$ approximately equal 

251: to $-z\Omega^2$.

252: 

253: These equations admit an energy (isolating) integral of the

254: motion, known as the Jacobi integral:

255: \begin{equation}\label{Jacobi}

256: H = \frac{1}{2}(\dot{x}^2+\dot{y}^2+\dot{z}^2)+\Phi_T+\Phi_C~,

257: \end{equation}

258: where

259: \begin{equation}\label{tidalpot}

260: \Phi_T=\frac{1}{2}\Omega^2\left(z^2-\nu x^2\right)

261: \end{equation}

262: is the tidal potential. Here $\nu\equiv 4 -\kappa^2/\Omega^2$

263: is a generally positive dimensionless coefficient.

264: 

265: Thus, at the level of single star orbits, we note that, in

266: general, the tidal potential leads to a compression in the

267: z-direction, a stretching in the x-direction, and leaves the

268: y-direction untouched. The tidal potential is static, breaks the

269: spherical symmetry, but is characterized by reflection symmetry

270: with respect to the three natural coordinate planes; strictly

271: speaking, the symmetry with respect to $(y,z)$ is applicable only

272: in the limit of an infinitely massive host galaxy \citep[see][]{Spi87}. 

273: In turn, we will see that the geometry of the tidal

274: potential induces a non-spherical distortion of the cluster shape

275: collectively, in particular an elongation along the x-axis and a

276: compression along the z-axis. In practice, the numerical

277: coefficient $\nu$ that defines quantitatively the induced

278: distortion depends on the galactic potential. We recall that we

279: have $\nu = 3$ for a Keplerian potential, $\nu = 2$ for a

280: logarithmic potential, while for a Plummer model the dimensionless

281: coefficient depends on the location of the circular orbit with

282: respect to the model scale radius $b$, with $\nu(R_0)=3 R_0^2/

283: (b^2+R_0^2)$ \citetext{for a definition of the Plummer model see, e.g.,

284: \citealp{Ber00}}.

285: 

286: Different assumptions on the geometry of the galactic field can be

287: treated with tools similar to those developed here, leading to a

288: similar structure of the equations of the motion, with a slight

289: modification of the tidal field. In particular, for an

290: axisymmetric galactic field, the tidal potential differs from the

291: one obtained here only by the z-term \citep{Cha42,HegHut03}. This 

292: case is often considered, for example by

293: referring to a globular cluster in circular orbit on the

294: (axisymmetric) disk of our Galaxy \citep[see][]{HegRam95,Ern08}, 

295: for which $\Phi_T$ is then formulated in terms of the Oort constants.

296: 

297: In the physical model outlined in this Section, the typical

298: dynamical time associated with the star orbits inside the cluster

299: is much smaller than the (external) orbital time associated with

300: $\Omega$. Therefore, in an asymptotic sense, the equilibrium

301: configurations that we will construct in the rest of the paper can

302: actually be generalized, with due qualifications, to more general

303: orbits of the cluster inside a galaxy, provided we interpret the

304: results that we are going to obtain as applicable only to a small

305: piece of the cluster orbit.

306: 

307: \subsection{The distribution function}

308: 

309: As outlined in the Introduction, we wish to extend the description

310: of quasi-relaxed stellar systems (so far basically limited to

311: spherical models associated with distribution functions $f =

312: f(E)$, dependent only on the single-star specific energy $E =

313: v^2/2 + \Phi_C$) to the non spherical case, by including the

314: presence of a non-spherical tidal field explicitly. Given the

315: success of the spherical King models in the study of globular

316: clusters, we will focus on the extension of models based on

317: $f_K(E)$, which is defined as a ``lowered" Maxwellian, continuous

318: in phase space, with an energy cut-off which implies the existence

319: of a boundary at the truncation radius $r_{tr}$.

320: 

321: Therefore, we will consider (partially) self-consistent models

322: characterized by the distribution function:

323: \begin{equation}\label{fK}

324: f_K(H)= A [\exp(-aH)- \exp(-aH_0)]

325: \end{equation}

326: \noindent if $H \le H_0$ and $f_K(H) = 0$ otherwise, in terms of

327: the Jacobi integral defined by Eq.~(\ref{Jacobi}). Here $H_0$ is

328: the cut-off value for the Jacobi integral, while $A$ and $a$ are

329: positive constants.

330: 

331: In velocity space, the inequality $H \le H_0$ identifies a

332: spherical region given by $0 \le v^2 \le 2 \psi({\bf r})/a$, where:

333: \begin{equation}\label{psi}

334: \psi({\bf r})=a\{H_0-[\Phi_C({\bf r})+\Phi_T(x,z)]\}

335: \end{equation}

336: is the dimensionless escape energy. Therefore, the boundary of the 

337: cluster is defined as the relevant zero-velocity surface by the 

338: condition $\psi({\bf r}) = 0$ and is given only implicitly by an 

339: equipotential ({\it Hill}) surface for the total potential $\Phi_C + 

340: \Phi_T$; in fact, its geometry depends on the properties of the tidal 

341: potential (of known characteristics; see Eq.~[\ref{tidalpot}]) and 

342: of the cluster potential (unknown {\it a priori}, to be determined 

343: as the solution of the associated Poisson equation).

344: 

345: The value of the cut-off potential $H_0$ should be chosen in such

346: a way that the surface that defines the boundary is closed. The

347: last (i.e., outermost) closed Hill surface is a {\em critical}

348: surface, because it contains two saddle points that represent the

349: Lagrangian points of the restricted three-body problem outlined in

350: the previous subsection. From

351: Eqs.~(\ref{eqmotion1})-(\ref{eqmotion3}), we see that such

352: Lagrangian points are located symmetrically with respect to the

353: origin of the local frame of reference and lie on the x-axis.

354: Their distance from the origin is called the {\em tidal radius},

355: which we denote by $r_T$, and can be determined from the condition:

356: \begin{equation}\label{tidalradius}

357: \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial x}(r_T,0,0)=0~.

358: \end{equation}

359: If, as a zero-th order approximation, we use a simple Keplerian 

360: potential for the cluster potential $\Phi_C$, we recover the 

361: classical expression (e.g., see Spitzer 1987):

362: \begin{equation}

363: r_T^{(0)} = \left(\frac{G M}{\Omega^2 \nu} \right)^{1/3}~,

364: \end{equation}

365: where $M$ is the total mass of the cluster.

366: 

367: As for the spherical King model, the density profile associated

368: with the distribution function (\ref{fK}) is given by:

369: \begin{equation}\label{rho}

370: \rho ( \psi ) = \hat{A}  e^ \psi \gamma \left({5 \over 2}, \psi

371: \right) \equiv \hat{A}\hat{\rho}(\psi)~,

372: \end{equation}

373: where $\hat{A} = {8 \pi A \sqrt{2}e^{-a H_0} /(3 a^{3/2})}$. We 

374: recall that the incomplete gamma function has non-negative real 

375: value only in correspondence to a non-negative argument. In the 

376: following, we will denote the central density of the cluster by 

377: $\rho_0 = \hat{A}\hat{\rho}(\Psi)$, where $\Psi\equiv \psi({\bf 0})$ 

378: is the depth of the central potential well.

379: 

380: \subsection{The parameter space}\label{parspa}

381: 

382: The models defined by $f_K(H)$ are characterized by two physical

383: scales (e.g., the two free constants $A$ and $a$, or,

384: correspondingly, the total mass $M$ and the central density

385: $\rho_0$ of the cluster) and two dimensionless parameters. The

386: first dimensionless parameter can be defined, as in the spherical

387: King models, to measure the {\it concentration} of the cluster. We

388: can thus consider the quantity $\Psi$, introduced at the end of

389: the previous subsection, or we may refer to the commonly used

390: concentration parameter:

391: \begin{equation}\label{concentr}

392: C = \log(r_{tr}/r_0)~,

393: \end{equation}

394: where $r_0 = \sqrt{9/(4 \pi G \rho_0 a)}$ is a scale length related 

395: to the size of the core and $r_{tr}$ is the truncation radius of 

396: the spherical King model associated with the same value of the 

397: central potential well $\Psi$ \citetext{the relation between $C$ 

398: and $\Psi$ is one-to-one; e.g., see \citealp{Ber00}}.

399: 

400: The second dimensionless parameter characterizes the strength of

401: the (external) tidal field:

402: \begin{equation}\label{tidalp}

403: \epsilon \equiv \frac{\Omega^2}{4 \pi G \rho_0}~.

404: \end{equation}

405: The definition arises naturally from the dimensionless formulation 

406: of the Poisson equation that describes the (partially)

407: self-consistent problem (to be addressed in the next Section).

408: 

409: In principle, for a given choice of the dimensional scales ($A$

410: and $a$) the truncation radius or the concentration parameter of a

411: spherical King model can be set arbitrarily. In practice, the

412: physical motivation of the models suggests that the truncation

413: radius $r_{tr}$ should be taken to be of the order of (and not

414: exceed) the tidal radius $r_T$, introduced in the previous

415: subsection (see Eq.~[\ref{tidalradius}]). We may thus define an

416: {\em extension parameter}, as the ratio between the truncation

417: radius of the corresponding spherical model and the tidal radius

418: $r_T$:

419: \begin{equation}\label{delta}

420: \delta \equiv \frac{r_{tr}}{r_T}~.

421: \end{equation}

422: For a given value of the central potential well $\Psi$,

423: there exists a (maximum) critical value for the tidal strength

424: parameter, which we will denote by $\epsilon_{cr}$, corresponding

425: to the maximum value for the extension parameter $\delta_{cr}$,

426: which can be found by solving the system:

427: \begin{equation}

428: \left\{

429: \begin{array}{ll}\label{sistcrit}

430: \displaystyle \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial

431: x}(r_T,0,0;\epsilon_{cr})=0  \vspace{.1cm}\\ \displaystyle

432: \psi(r_T,0,0;\epsilon_{cr})=0~.

433: \end{array}

434: \right.

435: \end{equation}

436: From this system, if we use the zero-th order Keplerian approximation 

437: for $\Phi_C$, we find that $\delta_{cr}^{(0)} = 2/3$ \citep[see][]{Spi87}.

438: 

439: For our two-parameter family of models we thus expect two tidal

440: regimes to exist. For models characterized by the pairs $(\Psi,

441: \epsilon)$ near the critical condition $\delta \approx

442: \delta_{cr}$ the tidal distortion should be maximal, while for

443: models with pairs well below criticality only small departures

444: from spherical symmetry should occur. A thorough exploration of

445: the parameter space will be carried out in a separate paper (Varri

446: \& Bertin, in preparation). In closing, we note that the models

447: proposed and studied by \citet{HegRam95} correspond to

448: the pairs in parameter space that we have called critical.

449: 

450: 

451: \section{The mathematical problem}

452: 

453: The (partially) self-consistent models associated with the

454: distribution function defined by Eq.~(\ref{fK}) are constructed by

455: solving the relevant Poisson equation. In terms of the

456: dimensionless escape energy $\psi$, given by Eq.~(\ref{psi}), the

457: Poisson equation (for $\psi \ge 0$) can be written as:

458: \begin{equation}

459: \nabla^2 (\psi + a \Phi_T) = -\frac{9}{r_0^2}\frac{\rho}{\rho_0} =

460: - \frac{9}{r_0^2}\frac{\hat{\rho}(\psi)}{\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}~,

461: \end{equation}

462: where $r_0$ is the scale length introduced in Sect.~\ref{parspa} 

463: (see Eq.~[\ref{concentr}]). We then rescale the coordinates and 

464: introduce the dimensionless position vector $\hat{{\bf r}} = {\bf r}

465: /r_0$, so that $\hat{\nabla}^2=r_0^2\nabla^2$ and $a \Phi_T \equiv 

466: \epsilon T=9 \epsilon (\hat{z}^2- \nu\hat{x}^2)/2$, where we have 

467: made use of the tidal parameter introduced in Eq.~(\ref{tidalp}). 

468: Therefore, the Poisson equation, for $\psi \ge 0$, can be written 

469: in dimensionless form as:

470: \begin{equation}\label{Poisson}

471: \hat{\nabla}^2\psi=-9\left[\frac{\hat{\rho}(\psi)}{\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}

472: +\epsilon(1-\nu)\right]~,

473: \end{equation}

474: while for negative values of $\psi$ we should refer to:

475: \begin{equation}\label{vacuum}

476: \hat{\nabla}^2 \psi=-9\epsilon (1-\nu)~,

477: \end{equation}

478: i.e. the Laplace equation $\hat{\nabla}^2(a\Phi_C)=0$. 

479: 

480: The mathematical problem is completed by specifying the

481: appropriate boundary conditions. As for the spherical King models,

482: we require regularity of the solution at the origin

483: \begin{eqnarray}

484: \psi({\bf 0})=\Psi~, \label{cond1}\\ 

485: \hat{\nabla} \psi({\bf 0})={\bf0}~, \label{cond2}

486: \end{eqnarray}

487: and, at large radii:

488: \begin{equation}

489: \psi + \epsilon T \rightarrow a H_0 \label{cond3}~,

490: \end{equation}

491: which corresponds to $a\Phi_C \rightarrow 0$.

492: 

493: Poisson and Laplace domains are thus separated by the

494: surface defined by $\psi=0$ which is unknown {\em a priori}; in

495: other words, we have to solve an elliptic partial differential

496: equation in a {\em free boundary} problem.

497: 

498: In the ordinary differential problem that characterizes the

499: construction of spherical models with finite mass, the condition

500: of vanishing cluster potential at large radii (together with the

501: regularity conditions at the origin) overdetermines the problem,

502: which can then be seen as an eigenvalue problem \citetext{e.g., see

503: Sect.~2.5 in \citealp{BerSti93}}. Indeed, for the King models the 

504: integration of the Poisson equation from the origin outwards, with 

505: ``initial conditions" (\ref{cond1})-(\ref{cond2}), sets the relation 

506: between the ratio $r_{tr}/r_0$ and $\Psi$ in order to meet the 

507: requirement (\ref{cond3}), with $r_{tr}/r_0$ thus playing the role 

508: of an ``eigenvalue".

509: 

510: In the more complex, three-dimensional situation that we are

511: facing here, the existence of two different domains, internal

512: (Poisson) and external (Laplace), suggests the use of the method

513: of matched asymptotic expansions in order to obtain a uniform

514: solution across the separation free surface. The solution in

515: the internal and external domains are expressed as an asymptotic

516: series with respect to the tidal parameter $\epsilon$, which is

517: assumed to be small (following the physical model described in the

518: previous Section):

519: \begin{equation}\label{asymserin}

520: \psi^{(int)}({\bf \hat{r}};\epsilon)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{1}

521: {k!}\psi_k^{(int)}({\bf \hat{r}}) \epsilon^k~,

522: \end{equation}

523: \begin{equation}\label{asymserext}

524: \psi^{(ext)}({\bf \hat{r}};\epsilon)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{1}

525: {k!}\psi_k^{(ext)}({\bf \hat{r}})

526: \epsilon^k~,

527: \end{equation}

528: with spherical symmetry assumed for the zero-th order terms. The 

529: internal solution should obey the boundary conditions

530: (\ref{cond1})-(\ref{cond2}), while the external solution should

531: satisfy Eq.~(\ref{cond3}). The two representations should be

532: properly connected at the surface of the cluster.

533:  

534: On the other hand, for any small but finite value of $\epsilon$

535: the boundary, defined by $\psi = 0$, will be different from the

536: unperturbed boundary, defined by $\psi_0 = 0$, so that, for each

537: of the two representations given above, there will be a small

538: region in the vicinity of the surface of the cluster where the

539: leading term is vanishingly small and actually smaller than the

540: remaining terms of the formal series. Therefore, we expect the

541: validity of the expansion to break down where the second term

542: becomes comparable to the first, i.e where $\psi_0 =

543: \mathcal{O}(\epsilon)$. This region can be considered as a {\em

544: boundary layer}, which should be examined in ``microscopic" detail

545: by a suitable rescaling of the spatial coordinates and for which

546: an adequate solution $\psi^{(lay)}$, expressed as a different

547: asymptotic series, should be constructed. To obtain a uniformly

548: valid solution over the entire space, an asymptotic matching is

549: performed between the pairs ($\psi^{(int)}$, $\psi^{(lay)}$) and

550: ($\psi^{(lay)}$, $\psi^{(ext)}$), thus leading to a solution

551: $\psi$, obeying all the desired boundary conditions, in terms of

552: three different, but matched, representations. This method of

553: solution is basically the same method proposed by \citet{Smi75} for

554: the analogous mathematical problem that arises in the

555: determination of the structure of rigidly rotating fluid

556: polytropes.

557: 

558: \section{Solution in terms of matched asymptotic expansions}

559: 

560: The complete solution to two significant orders in the tidal

561: parameter is now presented. The formal solution to three orders is

562: also displayed because of the requirements of the Van Dyke principle 

563: of asymptotic matching \citetext{cf. \citealp{Dyk75}, Eq.~[5.24]} that we have 

564: adopted.

565: 

566: \subsection{Internal region}

567: 

568: If we insert the series (\ref{asymserin}) in the Poisson equation

569: (\ref{Poisson}), under the conditions (\ref{cond1})-(\ref{cond2}),

570: we obtain an (infinite) set of Cauchy problems for $\psi_k$. The

571: problem for the zero-th order term (i.e., the unperturbed problem

572: with $\epsilon = 0$) is the one defining the construction of the

573: spherical and fully self-consistent King models:

574: \begin{equation}\label{ord0}

575: {\psi_0^{(int)}}^{''}+\frac{2}{\hat{r}}

576: {\psi_0 ^{(int)}}'=-9\frac{\hat{\rho}\left(\psi_0^{(int)}\right)}

577: {\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}~,

578: \end{equation}

579: with $\psi_0^{(int)}(0)=\Psi$ and ${\psi_0^{(int)}}'(0)= 0$, where 

580: the symbol $'$ denotes derivative with respect to the argument 

581: $\hat{r}$. We recall that the truncation radius $\hat{r}_{tr}$,

582: which defines the boundary of the spherical models, is given implicitly

583: by $\psi_0^{(int)}(\hat{r}_{tr})=0$.

584: 

585: Let us introduce the quantities:

586: \begin{equation}\label{rj}

587: R_j(\hat{r};\Psi) \equiv \frac{9}{\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}\frac{d^j

588: \hat{\rho}}{d\psi^j} \biggl\vert_{\psi_0^{(int)}}~.

589: \end{equation}

590: These quantities depend on $\hat{r}$ implicitly, through

591: the function $\psi_0^{(int)}$; in turn, the dependence on $\Psi$

592: is both explicit (through the term $\hat{\rho}(\Psi)$) and

593: implicit (because the function $\psi_0^{(int)}(\hat{r})$ depends

594: on the value of $\Psi$). For convenience, we give the 

595: expression of the first terms of the sequence (cf. Eq.~[\ref{rho}]):

596: $R_1 =[9/\hat{\rho}(\Psi)][\hat{\rho}(\psi_0^{(int)}) +

597: (\psi_0^{(int)})^{3/2}]$,

598: $R_2=R_1+27(\psi_0^{(int)})^{1/2}/[2\hat{\rho}(\Psi)]$,

599: $R_3=R_2+27(\psi_0^{(int)})^{-1/2}/[4\hat{\rho}(\Psi)]$.

600: Note that for $\psi_0^{(int)}\rightarrow 0$, i.e. for

601: $\hat{r} \rightarrow \hat{r}_{tr}$,

602: $R_1 \rightarrow 0$, $R_2 \rightarrow 0$, while for $j

603: \ge 3$ the quantities $R_j$ actually {\it diverge}. This is one

604: more indication of the singular character of our perturbation

605: analysis, which brings in some fractional power dependence on the

606: perturbation parameter $\epsilon$ (see also expansion [\ref{rhoexp}]).

607: 

608: Therefore, the equations governing the next two orders (for

609: $\psi_k^{(int)}$ with $k = 1,2$) can be written as:

610: \begin{equation}\label{ord1}

611: \left[\hat{\nabla}^2 +

612: R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)\right]\psi_1^{(int)}=-9(1-\nu)

613: \end{equation}

614: \begin{equation}\label{ord2}

615: \left[\hat{\nabla}^2+R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)\right]\psi_2^{(int)}=

616: -R_2(\hat{r};\Psi) ({\psi_1^{(int)}})^2

617: \end{equation}

618: \noindent with $\psi_1^{(int)}({\bf 0})=\psi_2^{(int)}({\bf 0})=0$

619: and $\hat{\nabla}\psi_1^{(int)}({\bf

620: 0})=\hat{\nabla}\psi_2^{(int)}({\bf 0}) ={\bf 0}$. The equation

621: for $k=3$ is recorded in Appendix A.1, where we also describe the

622: structure of the general equation for $\psi_k^{(int)}$.

623: 

624: For any given order of the expansion, the operator acting on the

625: function $\psi_k^{(int)}$ (see the left-hand side of

626: Eqs.~[\ref{ord1}] and [\ref{ord2}]) is the same, i.e. a Laplacian

627: ``shifted" by the function $R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)$. If we thus expand

628: every term $\psi_k({\bf \hat{r}})$ in spherical

629: harmonics\footnote{We use orthonormalized real spherical

630: harmonics with Condon-Shortley phase; with respect to the toroidal

631: angle $\phi$, they are even for $m \ge 0$ and odd otherwise.}:

632: \begin{equation}

633: \psi_k^{(int)}({\bf

634: \hat{r}})=\sum_{l=0}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-l}^{l}\psi_{k,lm}

635: ^{(int)}(\hat{r})Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)~,

636: \end{equation}

637: the three-dimensional differential problem is reduced to

638: a one-dimensional (radial) problem, characterized by the following

639: second order, linear ordinary differential operator:

640: \begin{equation}

641: \mathcal{D}_l = \frac{d^2 }{d

642: \hat{r}^2}+\frac{2}{\hat{r}}\frac{d}{d\hat{r}}

643: -\frac{l(l+1)}{\hat{r}^2}+R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)~.

644: \end{equation}

645: \noindent In general, for a fixed value of $l$, two independent

646: solutions to the homogeneous problem $\mathcal{D}_l f = 0$ are

647: expected \footnote{We note that

648: $R_1(0,\Psi)=9[1+\Psi^{3/2}/\hat{\rho}(\Psi)]$, i.e. a numerical positive

649: constant. Therefore, for $\hat{r} \rightarrow 0$ the operator $\mathcal{D}_l$

650: tends to the operator associated with the spherical Bessel

651: functions of the first and of the second kind \citetext{e.g., see

652: \citealp{AbrSte}, Eq.~[10.1.1] for the equation and

653: Eqs.~[10.1.4] and [10.1.5] for the limiting values of the functions

654: for small argument}.} to behave like $\hat{r}^l$ and $1/

655: \hat{r}^{l+1}$ for $\hat{r} \rightarrow 0$. Because of the

656: presence of $R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)$, solutions to equations where

657: $\mathcal{D}_l$ appears have to be obtained numerically.

658: 

659: For $k=1$ (see Eq.~[\ref{ord1}]) we thus have to address the

660: following problem. For $l=0$, the relevant equation is:

661: \begin{equation}\label{ord100}

662: \mathcal{D}_0 f_{00}=-9(1-\nu),

663: \end{equation}

664: where $f_{00} \equiv \psi_{1,00}^{(int)}/\sqrt{4\pi}$,

665: with $f_{00}(0) = f_{00}'(0) = 0$. Here we do not have to worry

666: about including solutions to the associated homogeneous problem,

667: because one of the two independent solutions would be singular at

668: the origin and the other would be forced to vanish by the required

669: condition at $\hat{r} = 0$. For $l \ge 1$ we have:

670: \begin{equation}\label{ord1lm}

671: \mathcal{D}_l\psi_{1,lm}^{(int)} = 0

672: \end{equation}

673: with $\psi_{1,lm}^{(int)}(0)={\psi_{1,lm}^{(int)}}'(0)=0$. 

674: Both Eq.~(\ref{ord1lm}) and the associated boundary conditions are

675: homogeneous. Therefore, the solution is undetermined by an

676: $m$-dependent multiplicative constant:

677: $\psi_{1,lm}^{(int)}(\hat{r})=A_{lm}\gamma_l (\hat{r})$, with

678: $\gamma_l(\hat{r})\sim \hat{r}^l$ for $\hat{r} \rightarrow 0$ (the

679: singular solution is excluded by the boundary conditions at the

680: origin). Then the complete formal solution is:

681: \begin{equation}\label{sol1}

682: \psi_{1}^{(int)}({\bf \hat{r}})=f_{00}(\hat{r}) +

683: \sum_{l=1}^{\infty}

684: \sum_{m=-l}^{l}A_{lm}\gamma_l(\hat{r})Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)~,

685: \end{equation}

686: where the constants are ready to be determined by means

687: of the asymptotic matching with $\psi_{1}^{(lay)}({\bf \hat{r}})$

688: at the boundary layer.

689: 

690: For $k = 2$ (see Eq.~[\ref{ord2}]) the relevant equations are:

691: \begin{equation}\label{ord2lm}

692: \mathcal{D}_l\psi_{2,lm}^{(int)}=-R_2(\hat{r};\Psi)\left[{\psi_1^{(int)}}

693: ^2\right]_{lm}~,

694: \end{equation}

695: where on the right-hand side the function $\psi_1^{(int)}$ is that 

696: derived from the solution of the first order problem (which shows 

697: the progressive character of this method for the construction of 

698: solutions). In Appendix A.2 the equations for the six relevant 

699: harmonics are displayed explicitly. The boundary conditions to be 

700: imposed at the origin are again homogeneous: $\psi_{2,lm}^{(int)}

701: (0) = {\psi_{2,lm}^{(int)}}'(0) =0$. For a fixed harmonic $(l,m)$ 

702: with $l > 0$, the general solution of Eq.~(\ref{ord2lm}) is the sum 

703: of a particular solution (which we will denote by $g_{lm} (\hat{r})$) 

704: and of a regular solution to the associated homogeneous problem given by

705: Eq.~(\ref{ord1lm}) (which we will call $B_{lm} \gamma_l(\hat{r})$,

706: with $ \gamma_l(\hat{r})$ the same functions introduced for the

707: first order problem). Obviously, the particular solution exists

708: only when Eq.~(\ref{ord2lm}) is non-homogeneous, i.e. only for

709: those values of $(l,m)$ that correspond to a non-vanishing

710: coefficient in the expansion of $({\psi_1^{(int)}})^2$ in spherical

711: harmonics. As noted in the first order problem ($k=1$), the

712: associated homogeneous problem for $l = 0$ has no non-trivial

713: solution. Then we can express the complete solution as:

714: \begin{equation}\label{sol2}

715: \psi_{2}^{(int)}({\bf \hat{r}})= g_{00}(\hat{r}) +

716: \sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-l}^{l}[g_{lm}

717: (\hat{r})+B_{lm}\gamma_l(\hat{r})]Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)~,

718: \end{equation}

719: where $B_{lm}$ are constants to be determined from the matching with the 

720: boundary layer.

721: 

722: Similarly, for $k=3$ the solution can be written as:

723: \begin{equation}\label{sol3}

724: \psi_{3}^{(int)}({\bf \hat{r}}) = h_{00}(\hat{r}) +

725: \sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-l}^{l}

726: [h_{lm}(\hat{r})+C_{lm}\gamma_l(\hat{r})]Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)~,\\

727: \end{equation}

728: where $h_{lm}$ are particular solutions and $C_{lm}$ are

729: constants, again to be determined from the matching with the

730: boundary layer.

731: 

732: Because the differential operator $\mathcal{D}_l$ and the boundary

733: conditions at the origin are the same for the reduced radial

734: problem of every order, we have thus obtained the general

735: structure of the solution for the internal region (see Appendix

736: A.1).

737: 

738: \subsection{External region}

739: 

740: Here we first present the general solution and then proceed to set

741: up the asymptotic series (\ref{asymserext}).

742: 

743: The solution to Eq.~(\ref{vacuum}) describing the external region,

744: i.e. in the Laplace domain, can be expressed as the sum of a

745: particular solution ($- \epsilon T({\bf \hat{r}})$) and of

746: the solutions to the radial part of the Laplacian operator

747: consistent with the boundary condition (\ref{cond3}):

748: \begin{equation}\label{extgen}

749: \psi^{(ext)}({\bf \hat{r}})=\alpha

750: -\frac{\lambda}{\hat{r}}-\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-l}^{l}

751: \frac{\beta_{lm}}{\hat{r}^{l+1}}Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)-

752: \epsilon T({\bf \hat{r}})~.

753: \end{equation}

754: Here we note that the tidal potential contributes only with spherical 

755: harmonics of order $l=0,2$ with even values of $m$:

756: \begin{eqnarray}

757: &&T_{00}(\hat{r})=-3\sqrt \pi (\nu-1)\hat{r}^2 \label{T00}~,\\

758: &&T_{20}(\hat{r})=3\sqrt{ \frac{\pi}{5}} (2+\nu)\hat{r}^2 \label{T20}~,\\

759: &&T_{22}(\hat{r})=-3\sqrt{ \frac{3\pi}{5}} \nu \hat{r}^2 \label{T22}~.

760: \end{eqnarray}

761: At this point we can proceed to set up the asymptotic series, by

762: expanding the constant coefficients $\alpha$, $\lambda$, and

763: $\beta_{lm}$ with respect to $\epsilon$:

764: \begin{equation}\label{alpha}

765: \alpha= aH_0 =

766: \alpha_0+\alpha_1\epsilon+\frac{1}{2!}\alpha_2\epsilon^2+..~,

767: \end{equation}

768: \begin{equation}

769: \lambda=\lambda_0+\lambda_1\epsilon+\frac{1}{2!}\lambda_2\epsilon^2+..~,

770: \end{equation}

771: \begin{equation}

772: \beta_{lm}=a_{lm}\epsilon

773: +\frac{1}{2!}b_{lm}\epsilon^2+\frac{1}{3!} c_{lm}\epsilon^3+..~.

774: \end{equation}

775: The last expansion starts with a first order term because the density 

776: distribution of the unperturbed problem is spherically symmetric.

777: 

778: For convenience, we give the explicit expression of the external

779: solution up to third order:

780: \begin{eqnarray}\label{ext}

781: &&\psi^{(ext)}({\bf \hat{r}})=

782: \alpha_0-\frac{\lambda_0}{\hat{r}}+\left\{\alpha_1-\frac{\lambda_1}

783: {\hat{r}}-\frac{T_{00}(\hat{r})}{2\sqrt \pi}-\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}

784: \sum_{m=-l}^{l}\left[ \frac{a_{lm}}{\hat{r}^{l+1}}+T_{lm}(\hat{r})\right]

785: Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)\right\}\epsilon\nonumber\\

786: &&+\frac{1}{2!}\left[\alpha_2-\frac{\lambda_2}{\hat{r}}-

787: \sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-l}^{l}\frac{b_{lm}}{\hat{r}^{l+1}}

788: Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)\right]\epsilon^2+\frac{1}{3!}\left[\alpha_3-

789: \frac{\lambda_3}{\hat{r}} -\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-l}^{l}

790: \frac{c_{lm}}{\hat{r}^{l+1}}Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi) \right]\epsilon^3~.

791: \end{eqnarray}

792: 

793: \subsection{Boundary layer}

794: 

795: The boundary layer is the region where the function $\psi$ becomes

796: vanishingly small. Since the unperturbed gravitational field at

797: the truncation radius is finite, $\psi_0'(\hat{r}_{tr})\ne 0$, for

798: any value of $\Psi$, based on a Taylor expansion of $\psi_0$ about

799: $\hat{r}=\hat{r}_{tr}$ we may argue that the region in which the

800: series (\ref{asymserin}) breaks down can be defined by

801: $\hat{r}_{tr}-\hat{r}= \mathcal{O}(\epsilon)$. In this boundary

802: layer we thus introduce a suitable change of variables:

803: \begin{equation}\label{eta}

804: \eta=\frac{\hat{r}_{tr}-\hat{r}}{\epsilon}~,

805: \end{equation}

806: take the ordering $\psi^{(lay)}=\mathcal{O}(\epsilon)$, and thus 

807: rescale the solution by introducing the function $\tau \equiv 

808: \psi^{(lay)}/\epsilon$. For positive values of $\tau$ the Poisson 

809: equation (\ref{Poisson}) thus becomes:

810: \begin{equation}\label{Poislay}

811: \frac{\partial^2  \tau}{\partial \eta^2}-\frac{2 \epsilon}{\hat{r}_{tr}-

812: \epsilon \eta}\frac{\partial \tau}{\partial \eta}+\frac{\epsilon^2}

813: {(\hat{r}_{tr}-\epsilon \eta)^2}\Lambda^2\tau=

814: -\frac{9}{\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}\,\epsilon\hat{\rho}

815: (\epsilon \tau)-9\epsilon^2(1-\nu)~,

816: \end{equation}

817: where $\Lambda^2$ is the angular part of the Laplacian in spherical 

818: coordinates. For negative values of $\tau$ we can write a similar 

819: equation, corresponding to Eq.~(\ref{vacuum}), which is obtained 

820: from Eq.~(\ref{Poislay}) by dropping the term proportional to 

821: $\hat{\rho}(\epsilon \tau)$.

822: 

823: With the help of the asymptotic expansion for small argument of

824: the incomplete gamma function \citetext{e.g., see \citealp{BenOrs99},

825: Eq.~[6.2.5]}, we find:

826: \begin{equation}\label{rhoexp}

827: \hat{\rho}(\epsilon\tau) \sim \frac{2}{5}\tau^{5/2}\epsilon^{5/2}

828: +\frac{4}{35}\tau^{7/2}\epsilon^{7/2}+...~,

829: \end{equation}

830: so that, within the boundary layer, the contribution of

831: $\hat{\rho}(\epsilon \tau)$ (which is the one that distinguishes

832: the Poisson from the Laplace regime) becomes significant only

833: beyond the tidal term, as a correction

834: $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^{7/2})$.

835: 

836: Therefore, up to $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^{2})$ we can write:

837: \begin{equation}\label{tau}

838: \tau= \tau_0 + \tau_1 \epsilon + \frac{1}{2!}\tau_2\epsilon^2.

839: \end{equation}

840: To this order, which is required for a full solution up

841: to $k=2$ of the global problem (see Eqs.~[\ref{asymserin}] and 

842: [\ref{asymserext}]), by equating in Eq.~(\ref{Poislay}) the first 

843: powers of $\epsilon$ separately, we obtain the relevant equations

844: for the first three terms:

845: \begin{equation}

846: \frac{\partial^2 \tau_0}{\partial \eta^2}=0~,

847: \end{equation}

848: \begin{equation}

849: \frac{\partial^2 \tau_1}{\partial \eta^2}=\frac{2}{\hat{r}_{tr}}\frac

850: {\partial \tau_0}{\partial \eta}~,

851: \end{equation}

852: \begin{equation}

853: \frac{\partial^2 \tau_2}{\partial

854: \eta^2}=\frac{4}{\hat{r}_{tr}}\left[ \frac{\partial

855: \tau_1}{\partial \eta}+\frac{\eta}{\hat{r}_{tr}}\frac {\partial

856: \tau_0}{\partial \eta}\right]-\frac{2}{\hat{r}_{tr}^2}\Lambda^2

857: \tau_0-18(1-\nu)~.

858: \end{equation}

859: The equations are easily integrated in the variable $\eta$, to 

860: obtain the solutions:

861: \begin{equation}\label{tau0}

862: \tau_0=F_0(\theta,\phi)\eta+G_0(\theta,\phi)~,

863: \end{equation}

864: \begin{equation}\label{tau1}

865: \tau_1=\frac{F_0(\theta,\phi)}{\hat{r}_{tr}}\eta^2+F_1(\theta,\phi)\eta

866: +G_1(\theta,\phi)~,

867: \end{equation}

868: \begin{eqnarray}\label{tau2}

869: &&\tau_2=\frac{2 F_0(\theta,\phi)}{\hat{r}_{tr}^2}\eta^3-\frac{1}

870: {3 \hat{r}_{tr}^2}\Lambda^2 F_0(\theta,\phi)\eta^3+\frac{2F_1

871: (\theta,\phi)}{\hat{r}_{tr}}\eta^2\nonumber\\

872: &&-9(1-\nu)\eta^2-\frac{1}{\hat{r}_{tr}^2}\Lambda^2

873: G_0(\theta,\phi)\eta^2+F_2(\theta,\phi)\eta+G_2(\theta,\phi)~.

874: \end{eqnarray}

875: The six free angular functions that appear in the formal solutions 

876: will be determined by the matching procedure.

877: 

878: \subsection{Asymptotic matching to two orders}

879: 

880: In order to obtain the solution, we must perform separately the 

881: relevant matching for the pairs $(\psi^{(int)},\psi^{(lay)})$ and 

882: $(\psi^{(lay)},\psi^{(ext)})$. We follow the Van Dyke matching

883: principle, which requires that we compare the second order expansion 

884: of the internal and external solutions  with the third order expansion 

885: of the boundary layer solution. The full procedure is described in 

886: Appendix A.3.

887: 

888: To first order (i.e., up to $k=1$ in series [\ref{asymserin}] and

889: [\ref{asymserext}]), from the matching of the pair $(\psi^{(int)},

890: \psi^{(lay)})$ we find the free angular functions of (\ref{tau0}) 

891: and (\ref{tau1}):

892: \begin{equation}\label{F0}

893:  F_0(\theta,\phi)=-{\psi_0^{(int)}}'(\hat{r}_{tr})~,

894: \end{equation}

895: \begin{equation}\label{G0}

896: G_0(\theta,\phi)=\psi_1^{(int)}(\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)~,

897: \end{equation}

898: \begin{equation}\label{F1}

899: F_1(\theta,\phi)=-\frac{\partial \psi_1^{(int)}}{\partial \hat{r}}

900: (\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)~,

901: \end{equation}

902: \begin{equation}\label{G1}

903: G_1(\theta,\phi)=\frac{1}{2}\psi_2^{(int)}(\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)~.

904: \end{equation}

905: From the matching of the pair $(\psi^{(ext)},\psi^{(lay)})$ we 

906: connect $\psi^{(ext)}$ to the same angular functions, thus proving 

907: that the matching to first order is equivalent to imposing continuity 

908: of the solution up to second order and of the first radial derivative 

909: up to first order. This allows us to determine the free constants that 

910: are present in the first two terms of (\ref{ext}) and in (\ref{sol1}):

911: \begin{equation}\label{alpha0}

912: \alpha_0=\frac{\lambda_0}{\hat{r}_{tr}}~,

913: \end{equation}

914: \begin{equation}\label{lambda0}

915: \lambda_0=\hat{r}_{tr}^2{\psi_0^{(int)}}'(\hat{r}_{tr})~,

916: \end{equation}

917: \begin{equation}\label{alpha1}

918: \alpha_1=f_{00}(\hat{r}_{tr})+\hat{r}_{tr}f_{00}'(\hat{r}_{tr})+\frac

919: {3 T_{00}(\hat{r}_{tr})}{2\sqrt \pi}~,

920: \end{equation}

921: \begin{equation}\label{lambda1}

922: \lambda_1=\hat{r}_{tr}^2f_{00}'(\hat{r}_{tr})+\frac{\hat{r}_{tr}T_{00}

923: (\hat{r}_{tr})}{ \sqrt\pi}~,

924: \end{equation}

925: \begin{equation}\label{A2m}

926: A_{2m}=-\frac{5 T_{2m}(\hat{r}_{tr})}{\hat{r}_{tr}\gamma_2'(\hat{r}

927: _{tr})+3\gamma_2(\hat{r}_{tr})}~,

928: \end{equation}

929: \begin{equation}\label{a2m}

930: a_{2m}=-\hat{r}_{tr}^3[A_{2m}\gamma_2(\hat{r}_{tr})+

931: T_{2m}(\hat{r}_{tr})]~.

932: \end{equation}

933: Note that $A_{lm}=a_{lm}=0$ if $l\ne 2$, for every value of $m$, and that 

934: the constants for $l=2$ are non-vanishing only for $m=0,2$. The constants 

935: that identify the solution are thus expressed in terms of the values of the 

936: unperturbed field ${\psi_0^{(int)}}'$, of the ``driving" tidal potential 

937: $T_{lm}$, and of the solutions $f_{00}$ and $\gamma_2$ (see Eqs.~[\ref{ord100}] 

938: and [\ref{ord1lm}]) taken at $\hat{r} = \hat{r}_{tr}$.

939: 

940: The boundary surface of the first order model is defined implicitly by 

941: $\psi_0^{(ext)}(\hat{r})+\psi_1^{(ext)}(\hat{r},\theta,\phi)\epsilon=0$,

942: i.e. the spherical shape of the King model is modified by monopole and 

943: quadrupole contributions, which are even with respect to toroidal and 

944: poloidal angles and characterized by reflection symmetry with respect to 

945: the three natural coordinates planes. As might have been expected from 

946: the physical model, the spherical shape is thus modified only by spherical 

947: harmonics $(l,m)$ for which the tidal potential has non-vanishing coefficients. 

948: Mathematically, this is non-trivial, because the first order equation

949: in the internal region Eq.~(\ref{ord1}) is non-homogeneous only for $l=0$; 

950: the quadrupole contribution to the internal solution is formally ``hidden" 

951: by the use of the function $\psi$ (which includes the tidal potential) and

952: is unveiled by the matching which demonstrates that $A_{2m}$

953: with $m=0,2$ are non-vanishing.

954: 

955: The first order solution can be inserted into the right-hand side of

956: Eq.~(\ref{ord2lm}) to generate non-homogeneous equations (and thus 

957: particular solutions) only for $l=0,2,4$ and corresponding positive 

958: and even values of $m$ (see Appendix A.2). We can thus proceed to 

959: construct the second order solution in the same way described above

960: for the first order solution. From the matching of the pair 

961: $(\psi^{(int)},\psi^{(lay)})$ we determine the missing angular 

962: functions:

963: \begin{equation}\label{F2}

964: F_2(\theta,\phi)=-\frac{\partial \psi_2^{(int)}}{\partial \hat{r}}

965: (\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)~,

966: \end{equation}

967: \begin{equation}\label{G2}

968: G_2(\theta,\phi)=\frac{1}{3}\psi_3^{(int)}(\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)~,

969: \end{equation}

970: which are then connected to the properties of $\psi^{(ext)}$ by the 

971: matching of the pair $(\psi^{(ext)},\psi^{(lay)})$. This is equivalent 

972: to imposing continuity of the solution up to third order and of the 

973: first radial derivative up to second order and leads to the determination 

974: of the free constants that appear in the third term of (\ref{ext}) and 

975: in (\ref{sol2}):

976: \begin{equation}\label{alpha2}

977: \alpha_2=g_{00}(\hat{r}_{tr})+\hat{r}_{tr}g_{00}'(\hat{r}_{tr})~,

978: \end{equation}

979: \begin{equation}\label{lambda2}

980: \lambda_2=\hat{r}_{tr}^2g_{00}'(\hat{r}_{tr})~,

981: \end{equation}

982: \begin{equation}\label{B2m}

983: B_{2m}=-\frac{\hat{r}_{tr} g_{2m}'(\hat{r}_{tr})+3g_{2m}(\hat{r}_{tr})}

984: {\hat{r}_{tr}\gamma_2'(\hat{r}_{tr})+3\gamma_2(\hat{r}_{tr})}~,

985: \end{equation}

986: \begin{equation}\label{b2m}

987: b_{2m}=-\hat{r}_{tr}^3[g_{2m}(\hat{r}_{tr} )+B_{2m} \gamma_2(\hat{r}_{tr})]~,

988: \end{equation}

989: \begin{equation}\label{B4m}

990: B_{4m}=-\frac{\hat{r}_{tr} g_{4m}'(\hat{r}_{tr})+5g_{4m}(\hat{r}_{tr})}

991: {\hat{r}_{tr}\gamma_4'(\hat{r}_{tr})+5\gamma_4(\hat{r}_{tr})}~,

992: \end{equation}

993: \begin{equation}\label{b4m}

994: b_{4m}=-\hat{r}_{tr}^5[g_{4m}(\hat{r}_{tr} )+B_{4m} \gamma_4(\hat{r}_{tr})]~.

995: \end{equation}

996: Here $B_{lm}=b_{lm}=0$ if $l\ne 2,4$ for every value of $m$; the only 

997: non-vanishing constants with $l=2,4$ are those with even $m$.

998: 

999: Therefore, the second order solution has non-vanishing contributions only

1000: for $l=0, 2,4$, i.e. for those harmonics for which the particular solution to 

1001: Eq.~(\ref{ord2}) is non-trivial. {\it By induction}, it can be proved (see 

1002: Appendix A.4) that the $k$-th order solution is characterized by $l=0,2,..,2k$

1003: harmonics with corrisponding positive and even values of $m$.  In reality, 

1004: the discussion of the matching to higher orders ($k>3$) would require a 

1005: re-definition of the boundary layer, because the density contribution on the 

1006: right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{Poislay}) (for positive values of $\tau$) comes 

1007: into play.  The asymptotic matching procedure carries through also in this 

1008: more complex case but, for simplicity, is omitted here. We should also keep 

1009: in mind that in an asymptotic analysis the inclusion of higher order terms 

1010: does not necessarily lead to better accuracy in the solution; the optimal 

1011: truncation in the asymptotic series depends on the value of the expansion 

1012: parameter (in this case, on the value of $\epsilon$) and has to be judged 

1013: empirically.

1014: 

1015: In conclusion, starting from a given value of the King concentration parameter 

1016: $\Psi$ and from a given strength of the tidal field $\epsilon$, the uniform 

1017: triaxial solution is constructed by numerically integrating Eqs.~(\ref{ord0}),

1018: (\ref{ord100}), (\ref{ord1lm}), and (\ref{ord2lm}) and by applying the 

1019: constants derived in this subsection to the asymptotic series expansion 

1020: (\ref{asymserin})-(\ref{asymserext}). The numerical integrations can be 

1021: performed efficiently by means of standard Runge-Kutta routines. The boundary 

1022: surface of the model is thus defined by $\psi_0^{(ext)}(\hat{r})+\psi_1^{(ext)}

1023: (\hat{r},\theta,\phi)\epsilon + \psi_2^{(ext)}(\hat{r},\theta,\phi)\epsilon^2/2=0$, 

1024: while the internal density distribution is given by $\rho = \rho(\psi_0^{(int)}

1025: (\hat{r})+\psi_1^{(int)}(\hat{r},\theta,\phi)\epsilon + \psi_2^{(int)}(\hat{r},

1026: \theta,\phi)\epsilon^2/2)$, with the function $\rho$ defined by Eq.~(\ref{rho}). 

1027: Any other ``observable" quantity can be reconstructed by suitable integration in 

1028: phase space of the distribution function $f_K(H)$ defined by Eq.~(\ref{fK}), with 

1029: $H$ defined by Eq.~(\ref{Jacobi}), and $\Phi_T + \Phi_C = H_0 - [\psi_0^{(int)}

1030: (\hat{r})+\psi_1^{(int)}(\hat{r},\theta,\phi)\epsilon + \psi_2^{(int)}(\hat{r},

1031: \theta,\phi)\epsilon^2/2]/a$.

1032: 

1033: In Fig.~1 and Fig.~2 we illustrate the main characteristics of one 

1034: triaxial model constructed with the method described in this Section.

1035:  

1036: 

1037: \section{Alternative methods of solution}

1038:  

1039: \subsection{The method of strained coordinates}

1040:  

1041: The mathematical problem described in Sect.~3 can also be solved

1042: by the method of {\em strained coordinates}, an alternative method

1043: usually applied to

1044: non-linear hyperbolic differential equations \citetext{e.g., see 

1045: \citealp{Dyk75}, Chapter 6} and considered by \citet{Smi76} in the 

1046: solution of the singular free-boundary perturbation problem that 

1047: arises in the study of rotating polytropes.

1048:  

1049: Starting from a series representation of the form

1050: (\ref{asymserin}) and (\ref{asymserext}) for the solution defined in

1051: the Poisson and Laplace domains, respectively, a transformation is

1052: considered from spherical coordinates $(\hat{r},\theta,\phi)$ to

1053: ``strained coordinates" $(s,p,q)$:

1054: \begin{eqnarray}\label{trans}

1055: && \hat{r}=s+\epsilon \hat{r}_1(s,p,q)+\frac{1}{2} \epsilon^2

1056: \hat{r}_2(s,p,q)+... \nonumber \\ &&\theta=p \nonumber \\

1057: &&\phi=q~,

1058: \end{eqnarray}

1059: where $\hat{r}_k(s,p,q)$ are initially unspecified straining functions. 

1060: We note that the zero-th order problem is defined by the same 

1061: Eq.~(\ref{ord0}) with the same boundary conditions but with the variable 

1062: $\hat{r}$ replaced by $s$. The unperturbed spherical boundary in the 

1063: strained space is defined by $s=s_0$, where $\psi_0^{(int)}(s_0)=0$. 

1064: To each order, the effective boundary of the perturbed configuration 

1065: remains described by the surface $s=s_0$, while in physical coordinates

1066: the truncation radius actually changes as a result of the straining 

1067: functions $\hat{r}_k$ that are determined progressively.

1068:  

1069: The Laplacian expressed in the new coordinates, $\widetilde{\nabla}^2$, 

1070: can be written as an asymptotic series: $\widetilde{\nabla}^2= L_0+

1071: \epsilon L_1+1/2 \epsilon^2 L_2+...$, where $L_k$ are linear second order 

1072: operators \footnote{Surfaces with constant $s$ in the strained space are 

1073: assumed to correspond to surfaces with constant $\psi^{(int)}$ in the 

1074: physical space, i.e. $\psi^{(int)}=\psi^{(int)}(s)$; therefore, $L_k$ 

1075: (with $k \ge 0$) is an ordinary differential operator for $\psi^{(int)}$.} 

1076: in which $\hat{r}_j(s,p,q)$ (with $j=1,..,k$) and their derivatives appear. 

1077: For convenience, we record the zero-th and first order operators:

1078: \begin{equation}

1079: L_0\equiv \frac{d ^2}{d s^2}+ \frac{2}{s}\frac{d}{d s}~,

1080: \end{equation}

1081: \begin{equation}\label{L1}

1082:  L_1\equiv -\left(2\frac{\partial \hat{r}_1}{\partial s}\right)

1083: \frac{d^2}{d s^2}-\left(\frac{\partial^2 \hat{r}_1}{\partial s^2}+

1084: \frac{2}{s}\frac{\partial\hat{r}_1}{\partial s} + \frac{1}{s^2}\Lambda^2

1085: \hat{r}_1+\frac{2}{s^2}\hat{r}_1\right) \frac{d }{d s}~,

1086: \end{equation}

1087: where $\Lambda^2$ is the standard angular part of the Laplacian, written 

1088: with angular coordinates $(p,q)$.  The general $k$-th order operator can 

1089: be decomposed as $L_k=L_1+F_k$, where $F_k$ is, in turn, a second order 

1090: operator in which $\hat{r}_j(s,p,q)$ (with $j=1,..,k-1$) appear and $L_1$ 

1091: is defined as in Eq.~(\ref{L1}) but with $\hat{r}_k(s,p,q)$ instead of 

1092: $\hat{r}_1(s,p,q)$; these operators appear in the relevant equation for 

1093: $\psi_k^{(int)}$:

1094: \begin{equation}

1095: [L_0+R_1(\psi;\epsilon)] \psi_k^{(int)}=L_k\psi_0^{(int)}

1096: \end{equation}  

1097: which corresponds to the general $k$-th order equation of the previous method.

1098:  

1099: Following a set of constraints that guarantee the regularity of the 

1100: series (\ref{asymserin}) in the strained space, the equations that 

1101: uniquely identify the straining functions to any desired order can 

1102: be found and solved numerically; structurally, they somewhat correspond 

1103: to Eqs.~(\ref{ord1lm}) and (\ref{ord2lm}) in Sect.~4.1. Therefore, the 

1104: internal and external solutions can be worked out and patched by requiring 

1105: continuity of the solution and of the first derivative with respect to 

1106: the variable $s$ at the boundary surface defined by $s=s_0$, in general 

1107: qualitative analogy with the method described in the previous section.

1108:  

1109: This method is formally more elegant than the method of matched

1110: asymptotic expansions but requires a more significant

1111: numerical effort because, even though the number of equations to

1112: be solved at each order is the same, the operator that plays here

1113: a central role in the equations for the straining functions, 

1114: $L_1\psi_0^{(int)}$ (interpreted as an operator acting on $\hat{r}_k[s,p,q]$), 

1115: is more complex than $\mathcal{D}_l$ (defined in Sect.~4.1).

1116:  

1117: \subsection{Iteration}

1118:  

1119: This technique follows the approach taken by \citet{PreTom70} 

1120: and by \citet{Wil75}, for the construction of

1121: self-consistent dynamical models of differentially rotating

1122: elliptical galaxies, and later by \citet{LonLag96},

1123: for their extension of King models to the rotating case.

1124:  

1125: In terms of the function:

1126: \begin{equation}

1127: u({\bf \hat{r}}) \equiv a[H_0-\Phi_C({\bf \hat{r}})]= \psi({\bf

1128: \hat{r}})+ \epsilon T({\bf \hat{r}})~,

1129: \end{equation}

1130: inside the cluster the Poisson equation can be written as:

1131: \begin{equation}\label{iterPoi}

1132: \hat{\nabla}^2 u=-\frac{9}{\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}\hat{\rho}(u-\epsilon T)~,

1133: \end{equation}

1134: while outside the cluster the Laplace equation is simply:

1135: \begin{equation}\label{iterLap}

1136: \hat{\nabla}^2 u=0~.

1137: \end{equation}

1138: The boundary conditions at the origin are $u({\bf0})=\Psi$ and 

1139: $\hat{\nabla}u({\bf 0})={\bf 0}$, because the tidal potential 

1140: $T({\bf \hat{r}})$ is a homogeneous function; the condition at 

1141: large radii is $u \rightarrow aH_0$.

1142:  

1143: The basic idea is to get an improved solution $u^{(n)}$ of the

1144: Poisson equation by evaluating the ``source term" on the right-hand

1145: side with the solution obtained in the immediately previous step:

1146: \begin{equation}\label{iterPoin}

1147: \hat{\nabla}^2

1148: u^{(n)}=-\frac{9}{\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}\hat{\rho}(u^{(n-1)}-\epsilon T)~.

1149: \end{equation}

1150: The iteration is seeded by inserting as $u^{(0)}$, on the right-hand

1151: side of Eq.~(\ref{iterPoin}), the spherical solution of the King models. 

1152: The iteration continues until convergence is reached.

1153:  

1154: In order to solve Eq.~(\ref{iterPoin}), we expand in spherical

1155: harmonics the solution and, correspondingly, the dimensionless

1156: density distribution:

1157: \begin{equation}\label{uexp}

1158: u^{(n)}({\bf \hat{r}

1159: })=\sum_{l=0}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-l}^{l}u_{lm}^{(n)}

1160: (\hat{r})Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)~,

1161: \end{equation}

1162: \begin{equation}\label{rhoitexp}

1163: \hat{\rho}^{(n)}({\bf \hat{r}

1164: })=\sum_{l=0}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-l}^{l}\hat

1165: {\rho}_{lm}^{(n)}(\hat{r})Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)~,

1166: \end{equation}

1167: so that the reduced radial problems for the functions $u_{lm}^{(n)}

1168: (\hat{r})$ are:

1169: \begin{equation}\label{equlm}

1170: \left[\frac{d^2 }{ d \hat{r}^2}+\frac{2}{\hat{r}}{d \over d

1171: \hat{r}} -{l(l+1)\over \hat{r}^2}

1172: \right]u_{lm}^{(n)}=-\frac{9}{\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}

1173: \hat{\rho}_{lm}^{(n-1)}~,

1174: \end{equation}

1175: with boundary conditions $u_{00}^{(n)}(0)=\Psi$, $u_{lm}^{(n)}(0)=0$ 

1176: and ${u_{00}^{(n)}}'(0)={u_{lm}^{(n)}}'(0)=0$.

1177: Here, in contrast with the structure of the governing equations

1178: for $\psi_k^{(int)}$ of Sect.~4.1 and Sect.~4.2, the radial part of 

1179: the Laplacian appears with no ``shift", for which the homogeneous

1180: solutions are known analytically. Thus the full solution to

1181: Eq.~(\ref{equlm}) can be obtained in integral form by the standard

1182: method of {\em variation of the arbitrary constants}:

1183: \begin{equation}\label{u00}

1184: u_{00}^{(n)}(\hat{r})=\Psi -\frac{9}{\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}\left[

1185: \int_0^{\hat{r}}\hat{r}'\hat{\rho}_{00}^{(n-1)}

1186: (\hat{r}')d\hat{r}'-\frac{1}{\hat{r}}\int_0^{\hat{r}}

1187: \hat{r}'^2\hat{\rho}_{00}^{(n-1)}(\hat{r}')d\hat{r}'\right]~,

1188: \end{equation}

1189: \begin{equation}\label{ulm}

1190: u_{lm}^{(n)}(\hat{r})= \frac{9}{(2l+1)\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}\left[\hat{r}^{l}

1191: \int_{\hat{r}}^{\infty}

1192: \hat{r}'^{1-l}\hat{\rho}_{lm}^{(n-1)}(\hat{r}')d\hat{r}'

1193: +\frac{1}{\hat{r}^{l+1}}\int_0^{\hat{r}}

1194: \hat{r}'^{l+2} \hat{\rho}_{lm}^{(n-1)}(\hat{r}')d\hat{r}'\right]~.

1195: \end{equation}

1196: The complete calculation can be found in the Appendix of \citet{PreTom70}. 

1197: Here we only remark that this integral form is valid in both Poisson and 

1198: Laplace domains because it contains simultaneously the regular and the 

1199: singular homogeneous solutions of the Laplacian. In the derivation, all 

1200: the boundary conditions have been used; in particular, the two conditions 

1201: at the origin are sufficient to obtain expression (\ref{u00}), while for 

1202: expression (\ref{ulm}) the one concerning the radial derivative at the origin 

1203: is used together with the one that describes the behavior at large radii (i.e. 

1204: $u_{lm}^{(n)}\rightarrow 0$ for $l \ge 1$). Furthermore, from the condition 

1205: at large radii evaluated for the harmonic $l=0$, i.e. $u_{00}^{(n)}/\sqrt{4\pi}

1206: \rightarrow aH_0^{(n)}$ (here the notation reminds us that the value of $H_0$ 

1207: is known only approximately and it changes slightly at every iteration), we find:

1208: \begin{equation}

1209: aH_0^{(n)}\equiv \frac{\Psi}{\sqrt{4\pi}} -\frac{9}{\sqrt{4\pi} 

1210: \hat{\rho}(\Psi)}\int_0^{\infty}\hat{r}'

1211: \hat{\rho}_{00}^{(n-1)}(\hat{r}')d\hat{r}'~,

1212: \end{equation}

1213: where we should recall that beyond a certain radius $\hat{\rho}_{00}^{(n-1)}$ 

1214: vanishes. 

1215: 

1216: In terms of the function $u$, the boundary of the cluster is given implicitly 

1217: by: $u({\bf \hat{r}})=\epsilon T({\bf \hat{r}})$. Therefore, the radial 

1218: location at which the $\hat{\rho}_{lm}^{(n-1)}$ vanishes is determined 

1219: numerically from:

1220: \begin{equation}

1221:  \hat{\rho}_{lm}^{(n-1)}(\hat{r})=\int_0^{2 \pi}\int_{-1}^{1} \hat{\rho}

1222: [u^{(n-1)}(\hat{r},\theta,\phi)-\epsilon T(\hat{r},\theta,\phi)]Y_{lm}

1223: (\theta, \phi) d(cos \theta)d\phi~.

1224: \end{equation}

1225:  

1226: In practice, to perform the iteration, the definition of a

1227: grid in spherical coordinates and of a suitable algorithm, in order

1228: to perform the expansion and the resummation in spherical harmonics 

1229: of $u$ and $\hat{\rho}$, is required; the number of angular points 

1230: of the grid and the maximum harmonic indices $(l,m)$ admitted in 

1231: the series (\ref{uexp}) and (\ref{rhoitexp}) are obviously related.

1232:  

1233: \section{Conclusions}

1234:  

1235: Spherical King models are physically justified models of

1236: quasi-relaxed stellar systems with a truncation radius argued to

1237: ``summarize" the action of an external tidal field. Such simple

1238: models have had great success in representing the structure and

1239: dynamics of globular clusters, even though the presence of the

1240: tidal field is actually ignored. Motivated by these considerations

1241: and by the recent major progress in the observations of globular

1242: clusters, in this paper we have developed a systematic procedure

1243: to construct self-consistent non-spherical models of quasi-relaxed

1244: stellar systems, with special attention to models for which the

1245: non-spherical shape is due to the presence of external tides.

1246:  

1247: The procedure developed in this paper starts from a distribution

1248: function identified by replacing, in a reference spherical model,

1249: the single star energy with the relevant Jacobi integral, thus

1250: guaranteeing that the collisionless Boltzmann equation is

1251: satisfied. Then the models are constructed by solving the Poisson

1252: equation, an elliptic partial differential equation with free

1253: boundary. The procedure is very general and can lead to the

1254: construction of several families of non-spherical

1255: equilibrium models. In particular, we have obtained the following

1256: results:

1257:  

1258: \begin{itemize}

1259: \item We have constructed models of quasi-relaxed

1260: triaxial stellar systems in which the shape is due to the presence

1261: of external tides; these models reduce to the standard spherical

1262: King models when the tidal field is absent.

1263: \item For these models we have outlined the general properties of

1264: the relevant parameter space; in a separate paper (Varri \&

1265: Bertin, in preparation) we will provide a thorough description of

1266: this two-parameter family of models, also in terms of projected

1267: quantities, as appropriate for comparisons with the observations.

1268: \item We have given a full, explicit solution to two orders in the 

1269: tidal strength parameter, based on the method of matched asymptotic 

1270: expansions; by comparison with studies of analogous problems in the 

1271: theory of rotating polytropic stars, this method appears to be most

1272: satisfactory.

1273: \item We have also discussed two alternative methods of

1274: solution, one of which is based on iteration seeded by the

1275: spherical solution; together with the use of dedicated $N$-body

1276: simulations, the ability to solve such a complex mathematical

1277: problem in different ways will allow us to test the quality of the

1278: solutions in great detail.

1279: \item By suitable change of notation and physical re-interpretation,

1280: the procedure developed in this paper can be applied to the

1281: construction of non-spherical quasi-relaxed stellar systems

1282: flattened by rotation (see Appendix B).

1283: \item The same procedure can also be applied to extend to the triaxial 

1284: case other isotropic truncated models (such as low-$n$ polytropes), 

1285: that is models that do not reduce to King models in the absence of

1286: external tides (see Appendix C).

1287: \end{itemize}

1288:  

1289: We hope that this contribution, in addition to extending the class

1290: of self-consistent models of interest in stellar dynamics, will be

1291: the basis for the development of simple quantitative tools to

1292: investigate whether the observed shape of globular clusters is

1293: primarily determined by internal rotation, by external tides, or

1294: by pressure anisotropy.

1295:  

1296: \acknowledgments

1297: 

1298: \appendix

1299: 

1300: \section{Details of the solution in terms of matched asymptotic expansion}

1301:  

1302: \subsection{The general equation}

1303:  

1304: From the Taylor expansion about $\epsilon=0$ of the right-hand

1305: side of Eq. (\ref{Poisson}), the structure of the equations for

1306: $\psi_k^{(int)}$ (with $k\ge 2$) can be expressed as:

1307: \begin{equation}\label{gen}

1308: \left[\hat{\nabla}^2+R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)\right]\psi_k^{(int)}=-\left(

1309: \sum_{j=2}^{k}R_j(\hat{r};\Psi)\,X_{k,j}\right)~,

1310: \end{equation}

1311: where $X_{k,j}$ denotes the terms that arise from the

1312: derivatives of $\psi^{(int)}(\hat{r};\epsilon)$ with respect to

1313: $\epsilon$, thus expressed as products of $\psi_i^{(int)}$ (with

1314: $i=1 ,..,k-1$). For fixed $k$ and $j$, the quantity $X_{k,j}$ is

1315: thus a sum of products of $\psi_i^{(int)}$ with subscripts that

1316: are j-part partitions of the integer $k$. Each product of

1317: $\psi_i^{(int)}$ is multiplied by a numerical factor defined as

1318: the ratio between $k!$ and the factorials of the integers that are

1319: parts of the associated partition (if an integer appears $m$ times

1320: in the partition, the factor must also be divided by $m!$). In

1321: particular, for $k=3$ we have:

1322: \begin{equation}

1323: X_{3,2}=3\psi_2^{(int)}\psi_1^{(int)}~{\rm and} \;\;\;\;

1324: X_{3,3}=(\psi_1^{(int)})^3~,

1325: \end{equation}

1326: because the 2-part partition of 3 is $2+1$ and the

1327: 3-part partition is trivially $1+1+1$, thus the relevant equation

1328: is:

1329: \begin{equation}

1330: \left[\hat{\nabla}^2+R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)\right]\psi_3^{(int)}=

1331: -R_2(\hat{r};\Psi)\,3\psi_2^{(int)}\psi_1^{(int)}-R_3(\hat{r};\Psi)\,

1332: (\psi_1^{(int)})^3~.

1333: \end{equation}

1334: Therefore, this formulation of the right-hand side of

1335: the general equation (together with the term $R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)

1336: \psi_k^{(int)}$ on the left-hand side) brings in the {\em Fa\'{a} 

1337: di Bruno formula} \citep{Faa1855} for the $k$-th order derivative

1338: of a composite function in which the inner one is expressed as a

1339: series in the variable with respect to which the derivation is

1340: performed.

1341:  

1342: \subsection{The equation for the second order radial problem}

1343:  

1344: The expansion in spherical harmonics of $(\psi_1^{(in)})^2$, which

1345: involves the product of two spherical harmonics with $l=0$ or

1346: $l=2$ (with $m$ positive and even), can be performed by means of

1347: the so-called 3-j Wigner symbols \footnote{For the definition of 

1348: 3-j Wigner symbols and the expression of the harmonic expansion 

1349: of the product of two spherical harmonics, see, e.g., \citet{Edm60}, 

1350: Eqs.~(3.7.3) and (4.6.5), respectively.}. Equation (\ref{ord2lm}) 

1351: thus corresponds to the following set of six equations:

1352: \begin{eqnarray}

1353: &&\mathcal{D}_0\psi_{2,00}^{(int)}=-R_2(\hat{r};\Psi){1\over

1354: 2\sqrt{\pi}}\;[(\psi_{1,00}^{(int)})^2+(\psi_{1,20}^{(int)})^2+

1355: (\psi_{1,22}^{(int)})^2]~,\\

1356: &&\mathcal{D}_2\psi_{2,20}^{(int)}=-R_2(\hat{r};\Psi){1 \over

1357: 7}\sqrt{{5\over\pi}}\;\left[{7\over

1358: \sqrt{5}}\psi_{1,00}^{(int)}\,\psi_{1,20}^{(int)}+(\psi_{1,20}

1359: ^{(int)})^2-(\psi_{1,22}^{(int)})^2

1360: \right]~,\\

1361: &&\mathcal{D}_2\psi_{2,22}^{(int)}=-R_2(\hat{r};\Psi){1\over

1362: \sqrt{\pi}}\;\left[\psi_{1,00}^{(int)}\,\psi_{1,22}^{(int)}-

1363: {2\sqrt{5}\over 7}\psi_{1,20}^{(int)}\,\psi_{1,22}^{(int)}\right]~,\\

1364: &&\mathcal{D}_4\psi_{2,40}^{(int)}=-R_2(\hat{r};\Psi){1\over

1365: 7\sqrt{\pi}}\;\left[3(\psi_{1,20}^{(int)})^2+\frac{1}{2}(\psi_{1,22}

1366: ^{(int)})^2\right]~,\\

1367: &&\mathcal{D}_4\psi_{2,42}^{(int)}=-R_2(\hat{r};\Psi){1\over

1368: 7}\sqrt{{15\over\pi}}\;\psi_{1,20}^{(int)}\,\psi_{1,22}^{(int)}~,\\

1369: &&\mathcal{D}_4\psi_{2,44}^{(int)}=-R_2(\hat{r};\Psi)\frac{1}{2}

1370: \sqrt{{5\over 7\,\pi}}\;(\psi_{1,22}^{(int)})^2~.

1371: \end{eqnarray}

1372: 

1373: \subsection{The asymptotic matching for the first order solution}

1374: 

1375: To derive the first order solution, the matching between the pairs

1376: $(\psi^{(int)}, \psi^{(lay)})$ and $(\psi^{(ext)},\psi^{(lay)})$

1377: requires that the internal (external) solution is expanded in a

1378: Taylor series around $\hat{r} = \hat{r}_{tr}$ up to terms of order

1379: $\mathcal{O}((\hat{r} - \hat{r}_{tr})^2)$, expressed with scaled

1380: variables, expanded up to $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2)$, and

1381: re-expressed with non-scaled variables:

1382: \begin{eqnarray}\label{intextexp}

1383: &&[\psi^{(~)}]^{(2)}(\hat{r},\theta,\phi)=\psi_0^{(~)}

1384: (\hat{r}_{tr})-{\psi_0^{(~)}}'(\hat{r}_{tr})(\hat{r}_{tr}-\hat{r})

1385: +\frac{1}{2}{\psi_0^{(~)}}^{''}(\hat{r}_{tr})(\hat{r}_{tr}-\hat{r})^2

1386: \nonumber\\ &&+\left[\psi_1^{(~)}(\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)

1387: -\frac{\partial \psi_1^{(~)}} {\partial

1388: \hat{r}}(\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)(\hat{r}_{tr}-\hat{r})\right]

1389: \epsilon+\frac{1}{2}\psi_2^{(~)}(\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)\epsilon^2~.

1390: \end{eqnarray}

1391: Here the closed parentheses include either ``int" or``ext", to denote 

1392: internal or external solution, while the notation $[\;]^{(2)}$ on the 

1393: left-hand side indicates that a second order expansion in $\epsilon$ 

1394: has been performed.

1395: 

1396: The boundary layer solution in the vicinity of $\eta = 0$ up to

1397: $\mathcal{O}(\eta^2)$, expressed with non-scaled variables and

1398: expanded (formally) up to third order in $\epsilon$ is given by:

1399: \begin{eqnarray}\label{layexp}

1400: && [\psi^{(lay)}]^{(3)}(\hat{r},\theta,\phi)=F_0(\theta,\phi)(\hat{r}_{tr}-\hat{r})

1401: +\frac{F_0(\theta,\phi)}{\hat{r}_{tr}}

1402: (\hat{r}_{tr}-\hat{r})^2 \nonumber\\

1403: &&+[G_0(\theta,\phi)+F_1(\theta,\phi)

1404: (\hat{r}_{tr}-\hat{r})]\epsilon+G_1(\theta,\phi)\epsilon^2~.

1405: \end{eqnarray}

1406: \noindent By equating equal powers of $\epsilon$ and

1407: $(\hat{r}_{tr}-\hat{r})$ in (\ref{intextexp}) and (\ref{layexp}),

1408: we find:

1409: \begin{eqnarray}

1410:  \psi^{(int)}_0(\hat{r}_{tr})&=\;\;\;\;\;0\;\;\;\;\;=&\alpha_0-

1411: \frac{\lambda_0}{\hat{r}_{tr}}~, \label{match0}\\

1412: {-\psi^{(int)}_0}^{'}(\hat{r}_{tr})&=F_0(\theta,\phi)=&-

1413: \frac{\lambda_0}{\hat{r}_{tr}^2}~, \label{match1}\\

1414: \frac{1}{2}{\psi^{(int)}_0}^{''}(\hat{r}_{tr})&\displaystyle =

1415: \frac{F_0(\theta,\phi)}{\hat{r}_{tr}}=&-\frac{\lambda_0}

1416: {\hat{r}_{tr}^3}~, \label{match2}\\

1417:  \psi^{(int)}_1(\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)&=G_0(\theta,\phi)=&

1418: \alpha_1-\frac{\lambda_1}{\hat{r}_{tr}}-\frac{T_{00}(\hat{r}_{tr})}

1419: {2\sqrt \pi}\nonumber\\ &&-\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-l}^{l}\left[\frac{a_{lm}}

1420: {\hat{r}^{l+1}_{tr}}+T_{lm}(\hat{r}_{tr})\right]Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)~, \label{match3}\\

1421: -\frac{\partial \psi_1^{(int)}}{\partial\hat{r}}(\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)&=

1422: F_1(\theta,\phi)=&-\frac{\lambda_1}{\hat{r}^2_{tr}}+\frac{T_{00}(\hat{r}_{tr})}

1423: {\sqrt \pi\hat{r}_{tr}}\nonumber\\ &&-\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=-l}^{l}\left[\frac{(l+1)a_{lm}}

1424: {\hat{r}^{l+2}_{tr}}-\frac{2T_{lm}(\hat{r}_{tr})}{\hat{r}_{tr}}\right]Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)~,

1425: \label{match4}\\ 

1426: \frac{1}{2}\psi^{(int)}_2(\hat{r}_{tr},\theta,\phi)&=G_1(\theta,\phi)=&\frac{1}{2}

1427: \left[ \alpha_2-\frac{\lambda_2}{\hat{r}_{tr}}-\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}

1428: \sum_{m=-l}^{l}\frac{b_{lm}}{\hat{r}_{tr}^{l+1}}Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)\right]~,

1429: \label{match5}

1430: \end{eqnarray}

1431: where the equalities on the left-hand side arise from

1432: the matching of the pair $(\psi^{(int)},\psi^{(lay)})$ and

1433: identify the free angular functions (\ref{F0})-(\ref{G1}), while

1434: those on the right-hand side arise from the matching of the pair

1435: $(\psi^{(ext)}, \psi^{(lay)})$. We also note that (\ref{match0})

1436: is consistent with the definition of the truncation radius and

1437: that (\ref{match2}) is equivalent to (\ref{match1}), because from

1438: Eq.~(\ref{ord0}) we have:

1439: ${\psi_0^{(int)}}^{''}(\hat{r}_{tr})=-(2/\hat{r}_{tr}){\psi_0^{(int)}}^{'}

1440: (\hat{r}_{tr})$.

1441: 

1442: The free constants (\ref{alpha0})-(\ref{lambda1}) are thus easily

1443: determined. For a given harmonic $(l,m)$ of Eqs.~(\ref{match3})

1444: and (\ref{match4}), with $l\ge 1$, the constants $A_{lm}$ and

1445: $a_{lm}$ are governed by the linear system with $i,j=1,2$:

1446: \begin{equation}\label{system}

1447: M_{ij} u_j= v_i~,

1448: \end{equation}

1449: where the matrix $M$ is given by

1450: \begin{equation}

1451: M = \left(

1452: \begin{array}{cc}

1453: \gamma_l(\hat{r}_{tr})&\hat{r}_{tr}^{-(l+1)}\\

1454: -\gamma_l'(\hat{r}_{tr})\hat{r}_{tr}&(l+1)\hat{r}_{tr}^{-(l+1)}

1455: \end{array}

1456: \right)~,

1457: \end{equation}

1458: and the vectors are defined as $(u_1,u_2)=(A_{lm},a_{lm})$ and

1459: $(v_1,v_2)=-T_{lm}(\hat{r}_{tr})(1,-2)$. Such linear system

1460: (\ref{system}) is well posed, i.e. $det M \ne 0$.

1461:  

1462: To show this, we may integrate Eq~(\ref{ord1lm}) for the regular

1463: solution, under the conditions $\gamma_l(0)=\gamma'_l(0)=0$:

1464: \begin{equation}

1465: \gamma_l'(\hat{r})\hat{r}^2=\int_0^{\hat{r}}[l(l+1)-R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)\hat{r}^2]\gamma_l(\hat{r})d

1466: \hat{r}~.

1467: \end{equation}

1468: In the vicinity of $\hat{r}=0$ the quantity $R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)

1469: \hat{r}^2$ is vanishingly small, so that, if the quantity

1470: $R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)\hat{r}^2$ remains smaller than $l(l+1)$, then

1471: the regular solution, starting positive and monotonic, remains a

1472: positive and monotonically increasing function of $\hat{r}$.

1473: Indeed, we have checked that this condition occurs for $l \ge 2$,

1474: because for $\Psi \in [0.5,10]$ the quantity

1475: $R_1(\hat{r};\Psi)\hat{r}^2$ has a maximum value in the range

1476: [4.229, 3.326]. Under this condition the function $\mu_l(\hat{r})

1477: \equiv \gamma_l'(\hat{r}) \hat{r} +(l+1)\gamma_l(\hat{r})$ cannot

1478: change sign, so that $det M =

1479: \hat{r}_{tr}^{-(l+1)}\mu_l(\hat{r}_{tr})$ cannot vanish. This

1480: argument does not work for the case $l=1$, in which the function

1481: $\mu_l(\hat{r})$ does change sign at a point

1482: $0<\hat{r}_0<\hat{r}_{tr}$, but we have checked directly that the

1483: property $det M \neq 0$ is satisfied also in this case.

1484:  

1485: Then expressions (\ref{A2m}) and (\ref{a2m}) are easily recovered

1486: and we conclude that for the harmonics that are not ``driven''by

1487: the tidal potential $T({\bf \hat{r}})$ the related $a_{lm}$ and

1488: $A_{lm}$ must vanish.

1489:  

1490: Similarly, for a given harmonic $(l,m)$ with $l\ge 1$,

1491: Eq.~(\ref{F2}), which is obtained from the

1492: second order matching, and Eq.~(\ref{match5}) can be cast in the form of

1493: Eq.~(\ref{system}), with $(u_1,u_2)=(B_{lm},b_{lm})$ and

1494: $(v_1,v_2)=(-g_{lm} (\hat{r}_{tr}),\hat{r}_{tr}

1495: g'_{lm}(\hat{r}_{tr}))$. Therefore, the argument provided above

1496: applies and we can conclude that for those harmonics for which the

1497: particular solutions $g_{lm}(\hat{r})$ are absent (or,

1498: equivalently, Eq.~[\ref{ord2lm}] is homogeneous), the constants

1499: $B_{lm}$ and $b_{lm}$ must vanish. A linear system equivalent to

1500: (\ref{system}) can be written for a fixed harmonic $(l,m)$ with

1501: $l\ge 1$ of the solution of general order $k$ and the same

1502: argument applies. Therefore, we conclude that the $k$-th order

1503: term of the solution contributes only to those harmonics for which

1504: the particular solutions are present.

1505: 

1506: \subsection{The structure of $k$-th order term}

1507: 

1508: Because we have noted (see argument introduced about

1509: the system [\ref{system}]) that the $k$-th order term

1510: of the solution has non-vanishing contribution only in

1511: correspondence of those harmonics for which the component of

1512: Eq.~(\ref{gen}) is non-trivial, the discussion about the structure

1513: of the term reduces to the analysis of the structure of the

1514: expansion in spherical harmonics of the right-hand side of that

1515: equation. Recalling that the harmonic expansion of the product of

1516: two spherical harmonics $(l_1,m_1)$ and $(l_2,m_2)$ can be

1517: expressed by means of 3-j Wigner symbols \citetext{see \citealp{Edm60},

1518: Eq.~[4.6.5]}, we note that the composed harmonic $(l,m)$ must

1519: satisfy the following {\em selection rules}: (i) $|l_1-l_2| \le l

1520: \le l_1+l_2$ (``triangular inequality"), (ii) $m_1+m_2=m$, and

1521: (iii) $l_1+l_2+l$ must be even. The last condition holds because

1522: in the cited expression the composed harmonic appears multiplied

1523: by the special case of the Wigner symbol with $(l_1,l_2,l)$ as

1524: first row and $(0,0,0)$ as second row. Bearing in mind that the

1525: first order term is characterized by harmonics with $l=0,2$ and

1526: corresponding positive and even values of $m$ and that the

1527: structure of the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{gen}) can be

1528: interpreted by means of the partitions of the integer $k$, it can

1529: be proved {\em by induction} that the $k$-th order term is

1530: characterized by harmonics with $l=0,2,...,2k$ and corresponding

1531: positive and even values of $m$.

1532: 

1533: \section{Extension to the presence of internal rotation}

1534:  

1535: It is well known that in the presence of finite total angular

1536: momentum of the system, relaxation leads to solid-body rotation

1537: (e.g., see Landau \& Lifchitz 1967). If we denote by $\omega$ the angular

1538: velocity of such rigid rotation and assume that it takes place

1539: around the $z$ axis, in the statistical mechanical argument that

1540: leads to the derivation of the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution one

1541: finds that in the final distribution function the single particle

1542: energy $E$ is replaced by the quantity $E - \omega J_z$. Following

1543: this picture, we may consider the extension of King models to the

1544: case of internal rigid rotation. This extension is conceptually

1545: simpler than that addressed in the main text of this paper,

1546: because the perturbation associated with internal rotation, while

1547: breaking spherical symmetry, preserves axial symmetry. We note

1548: that the models described below differ from those studied by

1549: \citet{KorAna71}, which were characterized by a different,

1550: discontinuous truncation, and those by \citet{PreTom70}

1551: and by \citet{Wil75}, which were characterized by a different

1552: truncation prescription and by differential rotation.

1553:  

1554: The relevant physical model is that of a rigidly rotating isolated

1555: globular cluster characterized by angular velocity

1556: $\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}=\omega \hat{e}_z$, with respect to a

1557: frame of reference with the origin in the center of mass of the

1558: cluster. We then introduce a second frame of reference,

1559: co-rotating with the cluster, in which the position vector is

1560: given by ${\bf r}=(x,y,z)$. In such rotating frame, the Lagrangian

1561: describing the motion of a star belonging to the cluster is given

1562: by:

1563: \begin{equation}

1564: \mathcal{L}=\frac{1}{2}(\dot{x}^2+\dot{y}^2+\dot{z}^2+2\omega\dot{y}x-

1565: 2\omega\dot{x}y)-\Phi_{cen}(x,y)-\Phi_C(x,y,z)~,

1566: \end{equation}

1567: \noindent where $\Phi_{cen}(x,y)=-(x^2+y^2)\omega^2/2$ is the

1568: centrifugal potential; the energy integral of the motion (called

1569: the Jacobi integral) is:

1570: \begin{equation}

1571: H=\frac{1}{2}(\dot{x}^2+\dot{y}^2+\dot{z}^2)+\Phi_{cen}+\Phi_C~.

1572: \end{equation}

1573: As in the tidal case, the extension of King models is performed by

1574: considering the distribution function $f_K(H)$, as in (\ref{fK}),

1575: for $H \le H_0$ and $f_K(H)=0$ otherwise, with $H_0$ the cut-off

1576: constant. The dimensionless energy is defined by:

1577: \begin{equation}

1578: \psi({\bf r})=a\{H_0-[\Phi_C({\bf r})+\Phi_{cen}(x,y)]\}~,

1579: \end{equation}

1580: \noindent and the boundary of the cluster, implicitly defined as

1581: $\psi({\bf r})=0$, is an equipotential surface for the total

1582: potential $\Phi_C+\Phi_{cen}$. Its geometry, reflecting the

1583: properties of the centrifugal potential, is characterized by

1584: symmetry with respect to the $z$-axis and reflection symmetry with

1585: respect to the equatorial plane $(x,y)$. The constant $\psi$

1586: family of surfaces, much like the Hill surfaces of the tidal case,

1587: is characterized by a {\em critical} surface which distinguishes

1588: the closed from the opened ones and in which the points on the

1589: equatorial plane are all saddle points. In these points the

1590: centrifugal force balances the self-gravity of the cluster; their

1591: distance from the origin, which we call {\em break-off radius}

1592: ($r_B$), can be determined from the condition:

1593: \begin{equation}\label{breakoffradius}

1594: \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial x}(r_B,0,0)=\frac{\partial

1595: \psi}{\partial y} (0,r_B,0)=0~.

1596: \end{equation}

1597: Following the argument that we gave in Sect.~2.2 for the

1598: tidal radius, we find a zero-th order approximation for the

1599: break-off radius: $r_B^{(0)}=(GM/\omega^2)^{1/3}$, where $M$ is

1600: the total mass of the cluster. The discussion about the parameter

1601: space that characterizes these models is equivalent to the one

1602: presented in Sect.~2.3, with:

1603: \begin{equation}

1604: \chi \equiv \frac{\omega^2}{4 \pi G \rho_0}~,

1605: \end{equation}

1606: a dimensionless parameter that measures the strength of

1607: the rotation with respect to the central density of the cluster,

1608: playing the role of $\epsilon$. Similarly, we may define an

1609: extension parameter $\sigma=r_{tr}/r_B$ (instead of $\delta$, see

1610: Sect.~2.3). For every value of the dimensionless central potential

1611: well $\Psi$, a maximum value for the strength parameter,

1612: $\chi_{cr}$, exists, corresponding to the critical condition in

1613: which the boundary of the cluster is given by the critical

1614: equipotential surface.

1615:  

1616: The relevant equations in the construction of these (fully)

1617: self-consistent models can be expressed in dimensionless form by

1618: means of the same rescaling of variables performed in Sect.~3.

1619: Thus, for $\psi \ge 0$, the Poisson equation can be written as:

1620: \begin{equation}\label{Poissonrot}

1621: \hat{\nabla}^2

1622: \psi=-9\left[\frac{\hat{\rho}(\psi)}{\hat{\rho}(\Psi)}-2\chi

1623: \right]~,

1624: \end{equation}

1625: where $\hat{\rho}$ is defined as in (\ref{rho}). For

1626: negative values of $\psi$ we should refer to:

1627: \begin{equation}\label{vacuumrot}

1628: \hat{\nabla}^2 \psi=18 \chi~,

1629: \end{equation}

1630: \noindent with the boundary conditions at the origin written as in

1631: (\ref{cond1})-(\ref{cond2}) and at large radii given by $\psi+\chi

1632: C \rightarrow aH_0$, where $C \equiv -(9/2)(\hat{x}^2+\hat{y}^2)$

1633: is the dimensionless centrifugal potential.

1634:  

1635: The solution up to second order in terms of matched asymptotic

1636: expansions presented in Sect.~4 can be adapted to this case

1637: without effort. In fact, with respect to the calculation presented

1638: in the main text only two differences occur: (i) wherever the

1639: constant term $-\hat{\nabla}^2T=-9(1-\nu)$ appears, it must be

1640: replaced here by $-\hat{\nabla} ^2C=18$ (the sign is the same in

1641: the two cases, because $1-\nu < 0$, see Sect. 2.1), and (ii)

1642: thanks to axisymmetry, in the angular part of the Laplacian the

1643: derivative with respect to the toroidal angle $\phi$ can be

1644: dropped and thus the terms of the asymptotic series

1645: (\ref{asymserin})- (\ref{asymserext}) can be expanded by means of

1646: Legendre polynomials\footnote{Following \citet{AbrSte}, we use 

1647: Legendre polynomials as defined in (22.3.8), i.e. with Condon-Shortley 

1648: phase, and normalized with respect to the relation (22.2.10). We 

1649: remark that, although they are structurally equivalent to zonal 

1650: spherical harmonics, the normalization is different.} instead of 

1651: spherical harmonics. The latter property implies that the radial 

1652: part of each term of the asymptotic series is characterized by 

1653: only one index, $l$, i.e. we can write $\psi_{k,l}^{(\;)}$. We 

1654: note that the differential operator that appears on the left-hand 

1655: side of the relevant equations for the solution defined in the 

1656: internal region is still $\mathcal{D}_l$, and thus also the functions 

1657: $\gamma_l(\hat{r})$ can be introduced in the same way as before. 

1658: As to the equations corresponding to (\ref{tau0})-(\ref{tau2}), 

1659: the formal solutions of the equations in the boundary layer, the 

1660: angular functions $F_i$ and $G_i$ (with $i=0,1,2$) now depend only 

1661: on the poloidal angle $\theta$. About the external solution, an 

1662: expression analogous to (\ref{extgen}) can be used, with the 

1663: particular solution given by $\chi C$ instead of $\epsilon T$. 

1664: The centrifugal potential contributes, as in the case of the 

1665: tidal potential, only with monopole and quadrupole terms, 

1666: explicitly:

1667: \begin{eqnarray}

1668: &&C_{0}(\hat{r})=-3\sqrt 2 \hat{r}^2 \label{C0}~,\\

1669: &&C_{2}(\hat{r})=3\sqrt{ \frac{2}{5}}\hat{r}^2 \label{C2}~.

1670: \end{eqnarray}

1671: Finally, as a result of the matching of the pair $(\psi^{(int)},

1672: \psi^{(lay)})$ up to second order, the expressions for the angular

1673: functions (\ref{F0})-(\ref{G1}) and (\ref{F2})-(\ref{G2}) are

1674: still applicable. In addition, from the matching of the pair

1675: $(\psi^{(lay)},\psi^{ext})$ up to second order, we find that the

1676: explicit expressions for the free constants follow

1677: Eqs.~(\ref{alpha0})-(\ref{a2m}) and (\ref{alpha2})-(\ref{b4m}),

1678: provided that we drop everywhere the index $m$ and we replace $3

1679: T_{00}(\hat{r}_{tr})/(2\sqrt \pi)$ with $3 C_0

1680: (\hat{r}_{tr})/\sqrt 2$ in (\ref{alpha1}) and

1681: $T_{00}(\hat{r}_{tr})/ (\sqrt \pi \hat{r}_{tr})$ with $2

1682: C_0(\hat{r}_{tr})/(\sqrt2 \hat{r}_{tr})$ in (\ref{lambda1}).

1683: Obviously, the particular solutions $f_0$ and $g_{l}$ (with

1684: $l=0,2,4$) are different from the ones obtained in the tidal case,

1685: because the right-hand side of the relevant equations is

1686: different. Also in this case, it can be proved {\it by induction}

1687: that the $k$-th order term has non-vanishing contributions only

1688: for $l=0,2,...,2k$.

1689:  

1690: For completeness, we record the explicit expression of the second

1691: order equations in the internal region:

1692: \begin{eqnarray}

1693: &&\mathcal{D}_0\psi_{2,0}^{(int)}=-R_2(\hat{r};\Psi){1\over\sqrt{2}}\;

1694: [(\psi_{1,0}^{(int)})^2+(\psi_{1,2}^{(int)})^2]~,\\

1695: &&\mathcal{D}_2\psi_{2,2}^{(int)}=-R_2(\hat{r};\Psi){\sqrt{10}

1696: \over7}\;

1697: \left[{7\over\sqrt{5}}\psi_{1,0}^{(int)}\,\psi_{1,2}^{(int)}+(\psi_{1,2}

1698: ^{(int)})^2\right]~,\\

1699: &&\mathcal{D}_4\psi_{2,4}^{(int)}=-R_2(\hat{r};\Psi){3 \sqrt

1700: 2\over7}\; (\psi_{1,2}^{(int)})^2~.

1701: \end{eqnarray}

1702: \noindent We remark that the Legendre expansion of the product of

1703: two Legendre polynomials is straightforward, because the 3-j

1704: Wigner symbols of interest all belong to the special case with

1705: $(0,0,0)$ as second row.

1706: 

1707: 

1708: \section{Extension of other isotropic truncated models}

1709: 

1710: The procedure developed in Sects.~3 and 4 can be applied also to

1711: extend other isotropic truncated models, different from the King 

1712: models, to the case of tidal distortions. Here we briefly describe 

1713: the case of low-$n$ polytropes ($1<n<5$), which are particularly 

1714: well suited to the purpose, because they are characterized by a 

1715: very simple analytical expression for the density as a function of 

1716: the potential; this class of models was also considered by \citet{Wei93}. 

1717: In the distribution function that defines the polytropes

1718: \citep[e.g., see][]{Ber00}, we may thus replace the single star energy 

1719: with the Jacobi integral (see definition [\ref{Jacobi}]) and consider:

1720: \begin{equation}\label{fP}

1721: f_P(H)=A(H_0-H)^{n-3/2}~,

1722: \end{equation}

1723: for $H \le H_0$, and a vanishing distribution otherwise. Unlike the 

1724: King family discussed in the main text, these models have no 

1725: dimensionless parameter to measure the concentration of the stellar 

1726: system, which depends only on the polytropic index $n$; in fact, the 

1727: spherical fully self-consistent polytropes are characterized only by 

1728: two physical scales, which are associated with the cut-off constant 

1729: $H_0$ and the normalization factor $A$. Below we consider values of 

1730: $n<5$, so that the models have finite radius.

1731: Therefore, the relevant parameter space for the tidally distorted models 

1732: is represented just by the tidal strength parameter $\epsilon$ (see 

1733: definition [\ref{tidalp}]), which, for a given value of the index $n$, 

1734: has a (maximal) critical value. The definition (\ref{delta}) for the 

1735: extension parameter $\delta$ is still valid if by $r_{tr}$ we denote 

1736: the radius of the unperturbed spherical configuration. The associated 

1737: density functional is given by:

1738: \begin{equation}

1739: \rho(\psi)=\rho_0 \psi^n~,

1740: \end{equation}

1741: where the dimensionless escape energy is given by:

1742: \begin{equation}

1743: \psi({\bf r})=\{H_0-[\Phi_C({\bf r})+\Phi_T({\bf r})] \}\left(\frac{c_n}

1744: {\rho_0}\right)^{1/n}~,

1745: \end{equation}

1746: with $c_n\equiv(2 \pi)^{3/2}\Gamma(n-1/2)A/n!$. The boundary of the 

1747: perturbed configuration is defined by $\psi({\bf r})=0$, following the 

1748: same arguments described in the main text. Here $\rho_0$ can be 

1749: interpreted as the central density if we set $\psi({\bf 0})=1$.

1750: 

1751: For $\psi \ge 0$, the relevant equation for the construction of the 

1752: self-consistent tidally distorted models is the Poisson equation, which, 

1753: in dimensionless form, is given by:

1754: \begin{equation}\label{Poissonpoly}

1755: \hat{\nabla}^2 \psi=-[\psi^n-\epsilon (1-\nu)]~,

1756: \end{equation}

1757: while for negative values of $\psi$ we must refer to Eq.~(\ref{vacuum}).

1758: Here the rescaling of variables has been performed by means of

1759: the scale length $\zeta\equiv \sqrt{\rho_0^{1/n-1}/(4 \pi G c_n^{1/n})}$.

1760: The relevant boundary conditions are given by $\psi({\bf 0})=1$ instead

1761: of (\ref{cond1}), while (\ref{cond2}) and (\ref{cond3}) hold unchanged.

1762: 

1763: If the polytropic index is in the range $1 < n < 5$, the solution up to 

1764: second order presented in Sect.~4 is fully applicable, provided that we 

1765: note that the problem for the zero-th order term of the series (\ref{asymserin}) 

1766: is now given by the Lane-Emden equation \citep[see, e.g.][]{Cha39}:

1767: \begin{equation}\label{LaneEmden}

1768: {\psi_0^{(int)}}^{''}+\frac{2}{\hat{r}}{\psi_0^{(int)}}'=-\left(\psi_0^

1769: {(int)}\right)^n~,

1770: \end{equation}

1771: with $\psi_0^{(int)}(0)=1$ and ${\psi_0^{(int)}}'(0)= 0$, where the symbol

1772: $'$ denotes derivative with respect to the argument $\hat{r}$; explicitly,

1773: the truncation radius $\hat{r}_{tr}$ is now defined by $\psi_0^{(int)}

1774: (\hat{r}_{tr})=0$, i.e. it represents the radius of the so-called

1775: {\em Emden sphere}. Correspondingly, the quantities called $R_j$

1776: in the main text must be re-defined as:

1777: \begin{equation}

1778: R_j(\hat{r};n) \equiv \frac{d^j\psi^n}{d\psi^j} \biggl\vert_{\psi_0^{(int)}}~;

1779: \end{equation}

1780: the value of $j$ at which the quantity $R_j$ may start to diverge depends 

1781: on the index $n$. Obviously, in Eq.~(\ref{Poislay}), i.e. in the Poisson 

1782: equation defined in the boundary layer, $\hat{\rho}(\epsilon \tau)$ must 

1783: be replaced by $(\epsilon \tau)^n$. This makes it clear that the value of 

1784: the polytropic index $n$ directly affects the order, with respect to the 

1785: perturbation parameter, at which the density contribution on the right-hand 

1786: side of Eq.~(\ref{Poislay}) comes into play and therefore changes the matching 

1787: procedure. If $n >1$, the density contribution emerges only after the second 

1788: order and thus the full procedure described in Sect.~4 is valid. In contrast, 

1789: if $n \le 1$ the procedure described in the main text is applicable only up to

1790: first order while the calculation of second order terms would require a 

1791: re-definition of the boundary layer (as it happens for the case discussed in 

1792: the main text when terms of order $k >3$ are desired).

1793: In closing, we note that the procedure presented in this paper can be applied 

1794: also to isotropic truncated models with more complicated expressions for the 

1795: density functional (e.g. the family of models $f_{1n}$ proposed by \citet{Dav77}, 

1796: without boundary conditions on tangential velocity, for which the density 

1797: functionals are expressed in terms of the error function and of the Dawson 

1798: integral), bearing in mind the last {\em caveat} about the possibility that 

1799: the density contribution may affect at some order the boundary layer, thus 

1800: requiring a reformulation of the results presented in Sect.~4. 

1801: 

1802: 

1803: 

1804: \begin{thebibliography}{}

1805: \bibitem[Abramowitz \& Stegun(1964)]{AbrSte} Abramowitz, M., Stegun, I.\ 1964,  Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Mineola, NY: Dover Publications) 

1806: \bibitem[Arena \& Bertin(2007)]{AreBer07} Arena, S.~E., \& Bertin, G.\ 2007, \aap, 463, 921

1807: \bibitem[Attico \& Pegoraro(1999)]{AttPeg99} Attico, N., \& Pegoraro, F.\ 1999, Phys. Pl., 6, 767

1808: \bibitem[Bender\& Orszag(1999)]{BenOrs99} Bender, C.M., \& Orszag, S.A.\ 1999, Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists and Engineers (Berlin: Springer-Verlag)

1809: \bibitem[Bertin \& Stiavelli(1993)]{BerSti93} Bertin, G., \& Stiavelli, M.\ 1993, Reports of Progress in Physics, 56, 493

1810: \bibitem[Bertin(2000)]{Ber00} Bertin, G.\ 2000, Dynamics of Galaxies  (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press)

1811: \bibitem[Bertin et al.(2003)]{Ber03} Bertin, G., Liseikina, T., \& Pegoraro 2003, \aap, 405, 73

1812: \bibitem[Bontekoe \& van Albada(1987)]{BonAlb87} Bontekoe, T.~R., \& van Albada, T.~S.\ 1987, \mnras, 224, 349

1813: \bibitem[Chandrasekhar(1933)]{Cha33} Chandrasekhar, S.\ 1933, \mnras, 93, 390

1814: \bibitem[Chandrasekhar(1939)]{Cha39} Chandrasekhar, S.\ 1939, An Introduction to the Study of Stellar Structure (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press)

1815: \bibitem[Chandrasekhar(1942)]{Cha42} Chandrasekhar, S.\ 1942, Principles of Stellar Dynamics (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press) 

1816: \bibitem[Chandrasekhar \& Lebovitz(1962)]{ChaLeb62} Chandrasekhar, S., \& Lebovitz, N.~R.\ 1962, \apj, 136, 1082

1817: \bibitem[Davoust(1977)]{Dav77} Davoust, E.\ 1977, \aap, 61, 391

1818: \bibitem[Davoust \& Prugniel(1990)]{DavPru90} Davoust, E., \& Prugniel, P.\ 1990, \aap, 230, 67

1819: \bibitem[Djorgovski \& Meylan(1994)]{DjoMey94} Djorgovski, S., \& Meylan, G.\ 1994, \aj, 108, 1292

1820: \bibitem[Edmonds(1960)]{Edm60} Edmonds, A.R.\ 1960, Angular Momentum in Quantum Mechanics (Second ed.; Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press)

1821: \bibitem[Ernst et al.(2008)]{Ern08} Ernst, A., Just, A., Spurzem, R., \& Porth, O.\ 2008, \mnras, 383, 897

1822: \bibitem[Fa\'{a} di Bruno(1855)]{Faa1855} Fa\'{a} di Bruno, C. F.\ 1855, Ann. di Scienze Matem. et Fisiche di Tortoloni 6, 479

1823: \bibitem[Frenk \& Fall(1982)]{FreFal82} Frenk, C.~S., \& Fall, S.~M.\ 1982, \mnras, 199, 565 

1824: \bibitem[Geyer et al.(1983)]{Gey83} Geyer, E.~H., Nelles, B., \& Hopp, U.\ 1983, \aap, 125, 359

1825: \bibitem[Goodwin(1997)]{Goo97} Goodwin, S.~P.\ 1997, \mnras, 286, L39

1826: \bibitem[Han \& Ryden(1994)]{HanRyd94} Han, C., \& Ryden, B.~S.\ 1994, \apj, 433, 80 

1827: \bibitem[Harris(1962)]{Har62} Harris, E.~G.\ 1962, Il Nuovo Cimento, 23, 115

1828: \bibitem[Heggie \& Hut(2003)]{HegHut03} Heggie, D., \& Hut, P.\ 2003, The Gravitational Million-Body Problem (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press) 

1829: \bibitem[Heggie \& Ramamani(1995)]{HegRam95} Heggie, D.~C., \& Ramamani, N.\ 1995, \mnras, 272, 317

1830: \bibitem[King(1961)]{Kin61} King, I.~R.\ 1961, \aj, 66, 68

1831: \bibitem[King(1965)]{Kin65} King, I.~R.\ 1965, \aj, 70, 376

1832: \bibitem[King(1966)]{Kin66} King, I.~R.\ 1966, \aj, 71, 64

1833: \bibitem[Kormendy \& Anand(1971)]{KorAna71} Kormendy, J., \& Anand, S.~P.~S.\ 1971, \apss, 12, 47

1834: \bibitem[Krogdahl(1942)]{Kro42} Krogdahl, W.\ 1942, \apj, 96, 124

1835: \bibitem[Lagoute \& Longaretti(1996)]{LagLon96} Lagoute, C., \& Longaretti, P.-Y.\ 1996, \aap, 308, 441

1836: \bibitem[Landau \& Lifchitz(1967)]{LanLif67} Landau, L. \& Lifchitz, E.M.,\ 1967, Physique Statistique (Moscou: MIR)

1837: \bibitem[Longaretti \& Lagoute(1996)]{LonLag96} Longaretti, P.-Y., \& Lagoute, C.\ 1996, \aap, 308, 453

1838: \bibitem[Lynden-Bell(1967)]{Lyn67} Lynden-Bell, D.\ 1967, \mnras, 136, 101

1839: \bibitem[Madsen(1996)]{Mad96} Madsen, J.\ 1996, \mnras, 280, 1089

1840: \bibitem[McLaughlin \& van der Marel(2005)]{McLMar05} McLaughlin, D.~E., \& van der Marel, R.~P.\ 2005, \apjs, 161, 304

1841: \bibitem[McLaughlin et al.(2006)]{McL06} McLaughlin, D.~E., Anderson, J., Meylan, G., Gebhardt, K., Pryor, C., Minniti, D.,

1842: \& Phinney, S.\ 2006, \apjs, 166, 249

1843: \bibitem[Milne(1923)]{Mil23} Milne, E. A.\ 1923, \mnras, 83, 118

1844: \bibitem[Monaghan \& Roxburgh(1965)]{MonRox65} Monaghan, F.~F., \& Roxburgh, I.~W.\ 1965, \mnras, 131, 13

1845: \bibitem[Prendergast \& Tomer(1970)]{PreTom70} Prendergast, K.~H., \& Tomer, E.\ 1970, \aj, 75, 674

1846: \bibitem[Ryden(1996)]{Ryd96} Ryden, B.~S.\ 1996, \apj, 461, 146 

1847: \bibitem[Schwarzschild(1979)]{Sch79} Schwarzschild, M.\ 1979, \apj, 232, 236

1848: \bibitem[Smith(1975)]{Smi75} Smith, B.~L.\ 1975, \apss, 35, 223

1849: \bibitem[Smith(1976)]{Smi76} Smith, B.~L.\ 1976, \apss, 43, 411

1850: \bibitem[Spitzer(1987)]{Spi87} Spitzer, L.\ 1987, Dynamical Evolution of Globular Clusters (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press)  

1851: \bibitem[Tassoul(1978)]{Tas78} Tassoul, J.-L.\ 1978, Theory of rotating stars (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press) 

1852: \bibitem[van Albada(1982)]{Alb82} van Albada, T.~S.\ 1982, \mnras, 201, 939

1853: \bibitem[van den Bergh(2008)]{Ber08} van den Bergh, S.\ 2008, \aj, 135, 1731

1854: \bibitem[van de Ven et al.(2006)]{Ven06} van de Ven, G., van den Bosch, R.~C.~E., Verolme, E.~K., \& de Zeeuw, P.~T.\ 2006, \aap, 445, 513

1855: \bibitem[Van Dyke(1975)]{Dyk75} Van Dyke, M.\ 1975, Perturbation Methods in Fluid Mechanics (Annotated ed.; Stanford, CA: The Parabolic Press)

1856: \bibitem[van Leeuwen et al.(2000)]{Lee00} van Leeuwen, F., Le Poole, R.~S., Reijns, R.~A., Freeman, K.~C., \& de Zeeuw, P.~T.\ 2000, \aap, 360, 472

1857: \bibitem[Weinberg(1993)]{Wei93} Weinberg, M.~D.\ 1993, in ASP Conf. Ser. 48, The Globular Cluster-Galaxy Connection, ed. G.~H. Smith, \& J.~P. Brodie, (San Francisco: ASP), 689

1858: \bibitem[White \& Shawl(1987)]{WhiSha87} White, R.~E., \& Shawl, S.~J.\ 1987, \apj, 317, 246

1859: \bibitem[Wilson(1975)]{Wil75} Wilson, C.~P.\ 1975, \aj, 80, 175

1860: \bibitem[Woolley \& Dickens(1962)]{WooDic62} Woolley, R.v.d.R, \& Dickens, R.~J.\ 1962, ROE Bull., 54

1861: \end{thebibliography}

1862: 

1863: 

1864: \clearpage

1865: 

1866: \begin{figure}

1867: \epsscale{0.5}

1868: \plotone{f1.eps}

1869: \caption{The critical Hill surface (in dimensionless variables) for a 

1870: second-order model with $\Psi=2$ and $\epsilon =7.043\times 10^{-4}$ 

1871: (corresponding to $\delta_{cr}^{(2)}=0.671$); the galactic potential 

1872: is Keplerian ($\nu=3$).\label{fig1}}

1873: \end{figure}

1874:  

1875: \begin{figure}

1876: \epsscale{1.00}

1877: \plotone{f2.eps}

1878: \caption{Sections in the three coordinate planes for a second-order 

1879: model with $\Psi=2$ and $\epsilon =7.000\times 10^{-4}$, characterized 

1880: by high tidal distortion ($\delta=0.669\approx \delta_{cr}^{(2)}$, see 

1881: Fig. \ref{fig1}) illustrating the boundary surface of the triaxial model (solid), 

1882: of the internal region (dotted), and of the corresponding spherical King 

1883: model (dashed); the filled area represents the inner region of the boundary 

1884: layer. Note the compression and the elongation with respect to the unperturbed 

1885: configuration in the $\hat{z}$- and $\hat{x}$-direction, respectively. The 

1886: galactic potential is Keplerian ($\nu=3$).}

1887: \label{fig2}

1888: \end{figure}

1889: 

1890: \end{document}

1891: 

1892: