1: % Original submission to The Astrophysical Journal: 14 December 1999
2: % Submission of first revision: 19 February 2000
3: % Submission of second revision: 16 March 2000
4: % Accepted for publication: 17 March 2000
5: %
6: %\documentstyle[12pt,aasms4]{preprint2}
7: \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
8: \tightenlines
9:
10: \def\teff {$T_{\rm eff}$}
11:
12: \begin{document}
13:
14: \title{The Predicted Signature of Neutrino Emission in Observations of Pulsating
15: Pre-White Dwarf Stars}
16:
17: \author{
18: M.~S.~O'Brien\altaffilmark{1}
19: \and
20: S.~D.~Kawaler\altaffilmark{2} }
21:
22: \altaffiltext{1}{Space Telescope Science Institute, 3700 San Martin Drive,
23: Baltimore, MD 21218; obrien@stsci.edu.}
24: \altaffiltext{2}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University,
25: Ames, IA 50011.}
26:
27: \begin{abstract}
28:
29: Pre-white dwarf (PWD) evolution can be driven by energy losses from neutrino
30: interactions in the core. Unlike solar neutrinos, these are not the
31: by-product of nuclear fusion, but instead result from electron scattering
32: processes in the hot, dense regions of the PWD core.
33:
34: We show that the observed rate of period change in cool PWD pulsators
35: will constrain neutrino emission in their cores, and we identify appropriate
36: targets for future observation. Such a measurement will tell us
37: whether the theories of lepton interactions correctly describe the production
38: rates and therefore neutrino cooling of PWD evolution. This would represent the
39: first test of standard lepton theory in dense plasma.
40:
41: \end{abstract}
42:
43: \keywords{
44: dense matter ---
45: elementary particles ---
46: plasmas ---
47: stars: interiors ---
48: stars: variables: GW~Virginis ---
49: white dwarfs}
50:
51:
52: \section{Introduction}
53:
54: In general, stars are too remote---and observables too few---to make
55: them practical experimental physics test-beds: our data are spent in simply
56: describing the dimensions of the objects under study. In many cases we must
57: extrapolate experimental data over many orders of magnitude, or resort
58: to untested calculations from first principles, to reach the regions
59: of phase space that apply to stellar interiors.
60:
61: If we hope to overcome these problems and pursue ``experimental'' astrophysics,
62: we can either attempt to increase the number of observables or find simpler
63: stars. As first realized by Mestel (1952), the evolution of white
64: dwarfs and pre-white dwarfs (PWDs) is primarily a simple cooling problem. In
65: general, our growing understanding of white dwarf interiors and evolution has
66: paralleled advances in the theory of dense plasmas, with the recognition of important
67: influences like electron degeneracy (Chandrasekar 1939), Coulomb interactions
68: (Salpeter 1961), crystallization (Kirzhnitz 1960; Abrikosov 1960; Salpeter 1961;
69: Stevenson 1980) and neutrino cooling effects (Chin, Chiu, \& Stothers 1966; Winget,
70: Hansen, \& Van Horn 1983; Kawaler, Hansen, \& Winget 1985). Iben \& Tutukov
71: (1984) summarize the various mechanisms which dominate
72: white dwarf evolution from the planetary nebula nucleus (PNN) stage to
73: the coolest white dwarfs.
74:
75: On the observational side, the discovery of white dwarf pulsation in the 1960s,
76: and pre-white dwarf pulsation in the 1970s, greatly increased the observable
77: parameters available for comparison with theoretical models. These are
78: short period, multiperiodic, $g$-mode variables, showing anywhere from a few to
79: over a hundred separate periodicities on timescales of 100-3000~s. The pulsating
80: PWD stars are divided into two classes: the planetary nebula nucleus variables
81: (PNNV stars), and the slightly more evolved GW~Virginis (or simply GW~Vir stars)
82: which lack observed nebulae. With high surface gravities (log~$g \sim 6-7.5$),
83: and effective temperatures between 80,000~K and 170,000~K, they occupy a region
84: of the H-R diagram between the high-\teff~end of the PNN branch and the top of
85: the white dwarf cooling track. There are eight known PNNV stars, and four
86: GW~Vir stars (Ciardullo \& Bond 1996).
87:
88: The evolutionary timescale of PWD stars is of order $10^{6}$ years. During this
89: short transition from PNN star to hot white dwarf, stellar radius and photon
90: luminosity decrease by one and three orders of magnitude, respectively.
91: High core density and temperature allow electron scattering processes to produce
92: a large neutrino flux which remains roughly constant during this time.
93: As photon luminosity plummets, neutrinos contribute an increasing fraction of the total
94: energy losses. Neutrino emission eventually comes to dominate the
95: overall evolution of the star.
96:
97: Unlike photon energy, which must diffuse relatively slowly through
98: the entire star before emerging into space, neutrinos created
99: near the center of the PWD escape directly.
100: This neutrino luminosity cools the center of the star, maintaining a
101: temperature inversion similar to that within stars at the tip of the red
102: giant branch. Calculations of
103: the relevant reaction rates were performed initially by Beaudet,
104: Petrosian, \& Salpeter (1967) based on the theory of weak interactions
105: proposed by Feynman \& Gell-Mann (1958). Later, Dicus (1972) and Dicus
106: et al.~(1976) recalculated these rates in the unified electroweak theory
107: of Weinberg and Salam (Weinberg 1967, Salam 1968). All of these
108: calculations are theoretical, however. We have no direct experimental
109: or observational confirmation of neutrino production rates under
110: conditions appropriate to PWD interiors.
111:
112: The cooling of a GW~Vir interior tends to increase the periods of
113: each given pulsation mode. Their high luminosity (log~$L \sim 0 - 3$)
114: means they cool much more rapidly than cooler white dwarf variables.
115: GW~Vir period changes are therefore expected to be more
116: rapid also. Winget, Hansen \& Van Horn (1983) show that the
117: $e$-folding time for period changes in GW~Vir stars should be
118: of the same order as the evolutionary timescale---$10^{6}$ years; such rapid changes
119: are measurable in $1-3$ years time. This is an exciting prospect: to measure directly,
120: on human timescales, the rate of evolution of a star, and specifically
121: to place strict constraints on the mechanisms which regulate the evolution
122: of a stellar interior. Over 30 years ago, Chin,
123: Chiu, and Stothers (1966) predicted that at some point in PWD evolution
124: neutrino losses should dominate all other cooling processes. Asteroseismological
125: analysis can tell us which stars these are, and then measurement of
126: period changes can tell us if our neutrino physics is right.
127:
128: Such a test has implications far beyond the study of
129: PWD evolution. For instance, one of the fundamental
130: questions of stellar astrophysics is the length of time stars spend on
131: the main sequence.
132: Answering this question requires precise knowledge of the p-p and CNO
133: nuclear reaction rates. Currently, the best laboratory for measuring
134: these rates is our own Sun, since terrestrial labs cannot in general
135: reproduce the conditions of the stellar interior. However, models
136: which successfully reproduce the known structure of the Sun predict a
137: neutrino flux two to three times that measured by earthly detectors
138: (Bahcall \& Pinsonneault 1996, and references therein). For a long
139: time, it was thought the problem might reside
140: in our incomplete knowledge of conditions in the solar interior. Recently,
141: helioseismology projects such as the Global Oscillation Network Group
142: (GONG) have resulted in the measurement of millions of solar pulsation
143: frequencies (Harvey et al.~1996). With so many parameters to constrain model
144: properties, the possibility that the solar neutrino problem can be solved
145: through variations in the thermodynamics or mechanics seems to be excluded
146: (Bahcall \& Pinsonneault 1996). The problem, then, almost certainly lies
147: with the way we handle the nuclear physics.
148:
149: Under the most intense scrutiny is the standard theory of lepton interactions.
150: Our calculations of neutrino emission from PWDs are based on this
151: same theory. In PWDs, however, the energy loss rate due to
152: neutrinos is thousands of times greater than in the Sun. Measurement of
153: the effects of neutrino interactions in PWDs would afford a
154: critical independent test not only of the standard lepton theory but also
155: of non-standard theories brought forward to solve the solar neutrino
156: problem.
157:
158: To explore this possibility, we calculated PWD evolutionary
159: tracks using different neutrino production rates. In the next section
160: we describe the calculation of those rates and summarize the basic
161: interactions that lead to neutrino emission in PWD interiors.
162: Section~3 describes PWD sequences with varied
163: neutrino production rates and examines effects on measurable quantities
164: such as $T_{\rm eff}$, surface gravity, and rate of period change.
165: Finally, in \S~4 we discuss prospects for placing observational
166: constraints on neutrino physics, and we identify appropriate targets
167: for future observation.
168:
169: \section{Neutrino Cooling in Pre-White Dwarf Interiors}
170:
171: Unlike the solar neutrino flux, neutrino emission in PWDs is not a
172: by-product of nuclear fusion. Instead, the
173: density and temperature in their cores are high enough
174: (log~$\rho_{\rm c} \sim$~6--7, log~$T_{\rm c} \sim$~7--8) to produce
175: neutrinos directly through several different scattering processes. The
176: two most important processes are {\it neutrino bremmstrahlung} and
177: {\it plasmon} excitation. Neutrino bremmstrahlung is much like the
178: normal bremmstrahlung process familiar to astrophysicists, in which
179: high-energy electrons scatter off nuclei, emitting X-rays. At the
180: high density and temperature of PWD interiors, however,
181: neutrinos can be produced instead.
182: %
183: % New, in response to comments by the referee:
184: %
185: These same conditions support the existence of thermally excited
186: photons within the plasma, analogous to phonons propagating within
187: a metal lattice. These ``plasmons'' have a finite lifetime and decay
188: to form a neutrino and antineutrino.\footnote{Actually there are two
189: types of plasmons. The process described here is that of the
190: {\it transverse} plasmon. The other, {\it longitudinal} plasmon
191: corresponds to an oscillation in the electron gas similar to a
192: sound wave, but is usually less important as a neutrino source in
193: hot white dwarfs (Itoh et al.~1992).}
194: %
195: % End New
196: %
197: %emissionderives from the dispersion relation of a photon in an electron
198: %gas, given by
199: %\begin{equation}
200: %(\hbar\omega)^{2} = (\hbar\omega_{\rm 0})^{2} + (\hbar kc)^{2}
201: %\end{equation}
202: %where $\omega$ is the photon angular frequency, $k$ is the wave number of
203: %the photon, and $\omega_{\rm 0}$ is the so-called plasma frequency.
204: %The plasma frequency depends on the electron temperature and density,
205: %and vanishes in free space. A photon obeying Equation~(1) behaves
206: %like a particle with an effective mass of $\hbar\omega_{\rm 0}/c^{2}$,
207: %and is therefore called a {\it plasmon}. Their effective mass
208: %means that (unlike photons in free space) plasmons can decay directly
209: %into electron-positron pairs which then annihilate into electron neutrinos
210: %and antineutrinos.
211:
212: The possible relevance of the plasma process to stellar astrophysics was
213: first pointed out by Adams, Ruderman, \& Woo (1963), who subsequently
214: calculated rates based on the theory of Feynman \& Gell-Mann (1958).
215: Beaudet, Petrosian \& Salpeter (1967) were the first to incorporate them
216: into stellar evolution calculations.
217: Later, Dicus (1972) recalculated the rates of various neutrino processes
218: in the unified electro-weak theory of Weinberg and Salam (Weinberg 1967,
219: Salam 1968).
220:
221: The rates used in our stellar evolution code, ISUEVO, derive from updated
222: calculations by Itoh et al.~(1996), and include the plasmon,
223: bremmstrahlung, and several less important neutrino production processes.
224: The evolution code ISUEVO (Dehner 1996; see also Dehner \&
225: Kawaler 1995) is optimized for the construction of PWD and white dwarf
226: models. The models used in this investigation are based on the evolution
227: of a $3~M_{\odot}$ model from the Zero Age Main Sequence through the thermally
228: pulsing AGB phase. After reaching a stable thermally pulsing stage
229: (about 15 thermal pulses), mass loss was invoked until the model evolved to
230: high temperatures. This model (representing a PNN) had a final mass of
231: $\sim 0.6~M_{\odot}$, and a helium-rich outer layer. Additional details
232: concerning the construction of this evolution sequence (and others of different
233: mass, discussed in \S~3, below) can be found in O'Brien (1998).
234:
235: To study the direct effects of neutrino losses on PWD
236: evolution, we introduced artificially altered rates well before the
237: evolving models reached the PWD track. If we simply changed
238: the rates beginning at the hot end of the PWD sequence,
239: the thermal structure of each model would take several thermal
240: timescales to relax to a new equilibrium configuration
241: based on the new rates. Unfortunately, this relaxation time is of
242: the same order as the PWD cooling time, and so only the
243: cool end of the sequence would see the full effects of the new rates
244: on their evolutionary timescales. Therefore, the enhanced and diminished
245: rates described in the next section were introduced into evolutionary
246: calculations beginning at the base of the AGB. The resulting thermal
247: structure of the initial PWD ``seed'' models was then already
248: consistent with the neutrino rates used during the prior evolution
249: that produced them.
250:
251: \section{Pre-White Dwarf Sequences with Different Neutrino Rates}
252:
253: Starting with the PWD seed models above, we
254: evolved the models from high $L$ and $T_{\rm eff}$
255: down toward the white dwarf cooling track. Three sequences were
256: calculated. The base sequence used the normal neutrino production rates.
257: Another sequence used rates diminished by a factor of three (at
258: any given $\rho$ and $T$ in the stellar interior) over the normal rates,
259: while the third sequence used rates enhanced by a factor of three.
260: This trio spans nearly one order of magnitude in neutrino production.
261:
262: The resulting $0.6\,M_{\odot}$ evolutionary sequences are shown in
263: Figure~1, from $T_{\rm eff} \sim 170,000\,K$---equivalent to the hottest
264: PWDs known---down to about $35,000\,K$.
265: Luminosity decreases by almost four orders of magnitude in approximately
266: five million years. The GW~Vir instability strip occupies the left half
267: of the figure, above $T_{\rm eff} \sim 80,000\,K$ (log~$T_{\rm eff} = 4.9$),
268: a temperature reached by the PWD models in only 500,000 years.
269:
270: \begin{figure}[h]
271: \includegraphics[scale=0.29,angle=-90]{figure1.ps}
272: \caption{Evolutionary tracks for three $0.6~M_{\odot}$ model
273: sequences with different input neutrino production rates.
274: The upper and lower tracks were calculated with rates one-third and
275: three times the normal rates (middle track), respectively.}
276: \end{figure}
277:
278: The most striking aspect of Figure~1 is the similarity of the tracks:
279: changing the neutrino rates seems to have little effect on the
280: luminosity at a given $T_{\rm eff}$ at {\it any} point
281: in PWD evolution, despite the importance of neutrino
282: losses as a cooling mechanism over much of this range. In
283: Figure~2, we find that, for all three sequences, neutrino losses
284: are the {\it primary} cooling mechanism over the approximate range
285: $100,000\,K < T_{\rm eff} < 30,000\,K$. Plasmon reactions dominate over
286: the bremmstrahlung process for 0.6~$M_{\odot}$ models at all stages of
287: PWD evolution, as shown in Figure~3.
288:
289: The ratio $L_{\nu}/L_{\gamma}$ also increases with stellar mass.
290: In the \teff~range 80,000--100,000~K, $L_{\nu}/L_{\gamma}$ for a
291: 0.66~$M_{\odot}$ model sequence is nearly 30\% higher than for a
292: 0.60~$M_{\odot}$ sequence.
293:
294: Figures~1 and 2 show that the differences in
295: $L$ and $T_{\rm eff}$ are smallest when the neutrinos are important.
296: This is because the primary {\it structural} effect of changing the
297: neutrino rates is on the radius of the models (Figure~4), causing the
298: tracks to assume a position in the $L$--$T_{\rm eff}$ plane normally
299: occupied by models of slightly higher mass (for enhanced rates) or lower
300: mass (for diminished rates). However, at lower temperatures electron
301: degeneracy becomes increasingly important as a mechanical
302: support against gravity (and thus in determining the final stellar radius);
303: neutrino cooling only affects the thermal processes participating in the
304: mechanical structure. Even at high luminosity, however, different neutrino
305: rates result in only small changes in measurable quantities such as surface
306: gravity. Current observational techniques could not hope to resolve such
307: small differences.
308:
309: \begin{figure}[h]
310: \includegraphics[scale=0.29,angle=-90]{figure2.ps}
311: \caption{Ratio of the neutrino luminosity to the photon luminosity as
312: a function of~$T_{\rm eff}$, for three~$0.6\,M_{\odot}$~model sequences
313: with different input neutrino production rates.}
314: \end{figure}
315:
316: Figure~5 shows a more tangible effect of changing the rates. Even
317: though models with different rates look much the same at a
318: given $T_{\rm eff}$, they get there at widely differing times, since
319: the rate of evolution along a track is directly dependent on
320: the importance of neutrino emission as a source of cooling.
321: For example, the model with enhanced neutrino rates cools from
322: $100,000$~K down to $65,000$~K in $600,000$~years, while the
323: model with diminished neutrino rates takes $1.3$~million years,
324: more than twice as long, to cool by the same amount. The
325: maximum difference in the slope of the different curves in Figure~5
326: occurs at $T_{\rm eff} \sim 80,000$~K. Thus
327: the epoch where the rate of evolution is most sensitive to the
328: assumed neutrino physics corresponds to the position in the
329: H-R diagram occupied by the coolest pulsators in the PWD
330: instability strip. On the other hand, for stars in the strip
331: hotter than $100,000$~K Figure~5 shows that
332: evolutionary rates do not depend on neutrino rates.
333:
334: \begin{figure}[h]
335: \includegraphics[scale=0.29,angle=-90]{figure3.ps}
336: \caption{Fraction of total neutrino luminosity contributed by
337: the plasmon and bremsstrahlung processes, as a function
338: of~$T_{\rm eff}$, for three~$0.6\,M_{\odot}$~model sequences
339: with different neutrino production rates.}
340: \end{figure}
341:
342: Our expectations are borne out in Figure~6, which shows the rate of
343: change in period, $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$ ($\equiv d(\ln\Pi)/dt$), as a function
344: of period, $\Pi$, for PWD models at $140,000$~K (lower panel)
345: and $80,000$~K (upper panel), given normal, enhanced, and diminished
346: neutrino production rates. The rate of period
347: change $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$ in the cooler models changes by a factor
348: of four between the enhanced and diminished rates. Changing the
349: neutrino rates has little effect on $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$ in the hotter
350: model, consistent with the results from Figure~5. We now turn to
351: the exciting implications of these results, and explore the possibility
352: and practicality of measuring $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$ in cool pulsating
353: PWD stars. We can then identify likely targets for future
354: observational campaigns.
355:
356: \section{Prospects for Measuring Neutrino Cooling Effects}
357:
358: \subsection{Determination of d$\Pi$/dt}
359:
360: Unfortunately, the period changes expected to occur in PWD stars are too small
361: to detect from simple comparison of the period from one year to that of the next.
362: To determine d$\Pi$/dt, a better technique is
363: to measure the cumulative phase change in a mode with a slowly changing period.
364: This is accomplished by comparing the observed times of maxima ($O$) in
365: the light curve to the times of maxima ($C$) calculated from an
366: assumption of constant period. The resulting plot of ($O-C$) shows the
367: phase drift associated with a changing period. A constant rate of period
368: change, d$\Pi$/dt, enters as a quadratic term in time:
369: \begin{equation}
370: (O-C) \approx \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{\Pi_{t_{o}}} \frac{d\Pi}{dt}
371: (t-t_{o})^{2} \;\;\;{\rm [sec]}
372: \end{equation}
373: where $\Pi_{t_{o}}$ is the period at time $t_{o}$ (see for example Winget
374: et al.~1985, 1991 and Kepler et al.~1995). To measure d$\Pi$/dt
375: with confidence, the star must of course have stable and fully resolved
376: pulsation periods, with reliable phase measurements from season to season.
377:
378: \begin{figure}[h]
379: \plotone{figure4.ps}
380: \caption{Thermal structure at three different evolutionary
381: stages, $T_{\rm eff}=140,000$~K (upper
382: panel), $80,000$~K (middle panel), and $30,000$~K (lower
383: panel), for $0.6~M_{\odot}$ models with different neutrino
384: production rates.}
385: \end{figure}
386:
387: \begin{figure}[h]
388: \includegraphics[scale=0.29,angle=-90]{figure5.ps}
389: \caption{Evolution of~$T_{\rm eff}$~with time for
390: three~$0.6\,M_{\odot}$~model sequences with different input neutrino
391: production rates.}
392: \end{figure}
393:
394: Kawaler, Hansen, \& Winget~(1985) and Kawaler \& Bradley (1994) present predicted
395: values of d$\Pi$/dt for models relevant to GW~Vir and PNNV stars; the
396: only observed value of d$\Pi$/dt, that for PG~1159 itself, is consistent
397: with these models. However, as Kawaler \& Bradley (1994) demonstrated,
398: for a star as hot as PG~1159, d$\Pi$/dt is strongly affected by mode
399: trapping. This is an effect whereby some modes become excluded from
400: regions below subsurface composition discontinuities. Kawaler \& Bradley (1994)
401: show that, in general, d$\Pi$/dt should be positive; this reflects the overall
402: cooling of the model (Winget, Hansen, \& Van Horn~1983). Trapped modes, however, are
403: concentrated in the outer layers, within which contraction dominates cooling;
404: therefore trapped modes can show periods which decrease with time. Thus, mode
405: trapping can complicate the interpretation of measured period changes in hot PWDs.
406: As GW~Vir stars cool, the surface contraction rate decreases
407: relative to the cooling rate of the interior. So, while mode trapping
408: can still influence the pulsation period distribution itself, the rates of
409: period change become more similar from mode to mode in cooler GW~Vir
410: stars. Kawaler \& Bradley (1994) found that the sign of d$\Pi$/dt could
411: be different for different modes in hot GW~Vir models; by the time those
412: models evolve to the cool end of the strip, the period change rates are
413: all positive.
414:
415: \subsection{Prospective Targets}
416:
417: Measurements of secular period change, $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$, in white dwarfs have
418: been attempted by a number of investigations, with either
419: measurements made or tight upper limits set for the GW~Vir star PG~1159
420: (Winget et al.~1985, 1991, Costa \& Kepler 1998) and G117-B15A (Kepler et
421: al.~1995). Unfortunately, neutrino cooling is not expected to be an important
422: effect for either of these stars. On the other hand PG~0122, with a \teff~of 80,000~K,
423: occupies the stage in GW~Vir evolution most highly dominated by neutrino
424: emission. O'Brien et al.~(1998) show that PG~0122 is in addition the most
425: massive GW~Vir star, which should enhance neutrino effects as well.
426:
427: \begin{figure}[h]
428: \includegraphics[scale=0.37]{figure6.ps}
429: \caption{Rate of period change for $0.6~M_{\odot}$ models with
430: different neutrino rates.}
431: \end{figure}
432:
433: In order to measure $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$ with confidence, a star must have a stable
434: and fully resolved pulsation, with stable phase measurements from season
435: to season. PG~0122 is a very stable pulsator: over the past decade, it
436: has shown a consistent pulsation spectrum, with the large-amplitude modes
437: present at the same frequencies during each of three intensive observing
438: seasons in 1986, 1990, and 1996. The amplitudes of each of the dominant
439: modes remained approximately constant as well (O'Brien et al.~1998).
440: Therefore, PG~0122 is an excellent candidate for measurement of the rate of
441: secular period change caused by the evolutionary cooling of its interior.
442:
443: In addition to the physics governing neutrino production, PG~0122 is
444: an ideal target for measuring neutrino emission rates because of the
445: minimal influence of any mode trapping on interpretation of its $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$.
446: As mentioned above, for stars below 100,000~K trapping no longer significantly affects
447: $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$ from mode to mode.
448:
449: From Figure~6, we estimate the value of $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$ for the dominant pulsation
450: mode ($\Pi = 400$~s) in PG~0122 to be about $6\times 10^{-15}$~sec~$^{-1}$.
451: With this rate of period change, the period should increase by about
452: $0.001$~s in 10 years; this is smaller than the period uncertainty
453: for a run length of several months (assuming a frequency precision of
454: $\frac{1}{10 \times {\rm run~length}}$). However, the accumulated phase
455: advance over a ten year period should be {\it nearly two full cycles}.
456:
457: Using the periods alone from the 1986, 1990, and 1996 data, O'Brien et al.~(1998)
458: attempted to calculate $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$ directly. From the best least-squares periods
459: from 1996 and 1986, they calculate a period change of $-0.10 \pm 0.02$~s,
460: implying $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi = -7 \times 10^{-13}$~sec~$^{-1}$, about 100 times
461: larger in magnitude---and different in sign---than theory expects. However,
462: as O'Brien et al.~(1998) point out, this calculation is based on the formal
463: errors from a least-squares fit to the observed periods, and the
464: {\it formal} least-squares error generally
465: underestimates the true error by an order of magnitude. In practice, the
466: data currently available allow an upper limit to be set on the absolute
467: magnitude of $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$
468: for PG~0122 of $1.5 \times 10^{-12}$~sec~$^{-1}$. In view of the importance
469: of measuring $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$ for this star---as well as for the other cool
470: GW~Vir stars---we must continue analysis of archival data and mount observing
471: campaigns in the near future to monitor all the known GW~Vir stars with
472: \teff~$< 100,000$~K. With frequent observation, an accumulated phase advance
473: of half a cycle, combined with the techniques described above, could be
474: used to determine $\dot{\Pi}/\Pi$ for the GW~Vir stars PG~0122, PG~2131, and
475: PG~1707 in two to three years. In the case of PG~0122, the data presented in
476: O'Brien et al.~(1998) provide a key anchor for this investigation.
477:
478: \section{Summary and Conclusions}
479:
480: We have shown that the predicted rates of period change in GW~Vir stars near
481: the cool end of the instability strip are sensitive to the neutrino production
482: rates used in stellar models. The persistence of the solar neutrino problem
483: has made the standard model of neutrino interactions one of the most intensely
484: scrutinized theories in all of physics. Determination of $\dot{\Pi}$ in
485: the GW~Vir stars PG~0122 and PG~2131 will provide an important test of the
486: standard model and of any new theories put forward to replace it.
487:
488: \acknowledgments
489:
490: The authors express their appreciation to Chris Clemens for valuable editorial
491: comments. We also thank the anonymous referee who, in particular, helped clarify
492: our understanding and explanation of lepton scattering theory as it applies to
493: white dwarf interiors.
494:
495: MSO'B was supported during much of this research by a GAANN fellowship
496: through grant P200A10522 from the Department of Education to Iowa State University.
497: Support also came from the National Science Foundation under the NSF Young Investigator
498: Program (Grant AST-9257049) to SDK at Iowa State University. Finally, some support
499: for this work came to SDK from the NASA Astrophysics Theory Program through award
500: NAG5-4060 to Iowa State University.
501:
502: \begin{thebibliography}{}
503:
504: \item Abrikosov, A. 1960, SvPhJETP, 39, 1797
505:
506: \item Adams, J.B., Ruderman, M.A.~\& Woo, C.H.~1963,
507: Phys. Rev., 129, 1383
508:
509: \item Bahcall, J.N.~\& Pinsonneault, M.H.~1996 \baas, 189, 56.01
510:
511: \item Beaudet, G., Petrosian, V.~\& Salpeter, E.E.~1967, \apj, 150, 979
512:
513: \item Chandrasekhar, S.~1939, An Introduction to Stellar Structure,
514: (Chicago: Univ.~Chicago Press)
515:
516: \item Ciardullo, R.~\& Bond, H.E.~1996, \aj, 111, 2332
517:
518: \item Chin, C.W., Chiu, H.Y.~\& Stothers, R.~1966, AnPhy, 39, 280
519:
520: \item Costa, J.E.S.~\& Kepler, S.O.~1998, Balt. Ast., 7, 83
521:
522: \item Dehner, B.T.~1996, PhD thesis, Iowa State Univ.
523:
524: \item Dehner, B.T.~\& Kawaler, S.D.~1995, \apjl, 445, 141
525:
526: \item Dicus, D.A.~1972, \prd, 6, 941
527:
528: \item Dicus, D.A., Kolb, E.W., Schramm, D.N.~\& Tubbs, D.L.~1972, \apj, 210, 481
529:
530: \item Feynman, R.P.~\& Gell-Mann, M.~1958, Phys.~Rev., 109, 193
531:
532: \item Harvey, J.W.~et al.~1996, Science, 272, 1284
533:
534: \item Iben, I.~Jr.~\& Tutukov, A.V.~1984, \apj, 282, 615
535:
536: %
537: % New, in response to comments by the referee:
538: %
539: \item Itoh, N., Mutoh, H., Hikita, A.~\& Kohyama, Y.~1992 \apj, 395, 622
540: %
541: % End New
542: %
543: \item Itoh, N., Hayashi, H., Nishikawa, A.~\& Kohyama, Y.~1996 \apjs, 102, 411
544:
545: \item Kawaler, S.D., Hansen, C.J.~\& Winget, D.E.~1985, \apj, 295, 547
546:
547: \item Kawaler, S.D.~\& Bradley, P.A.~1994, \apj, 427, 415
548:
549: \item Kepler, S.O.~et al.~1995, Balt. Ast., 4, 221
550:
551: \item Kirzhnitz, D.A.~1960, SvPhJETP, 38, 503
552:
553: \item Mestel, L.~1952 \mnras, 112, 583
554:
555: \item O'Brien, M.S.~1998 \apj, submitted
556:
557: \item O'Brien, M.S.~et al.~1998 \apj, 495, 458
558:
559: \item Salam, A.~1968, in Elementary Particle Physics, ed.~N.~Svartholm,
560: (Stockholm: Almquist \& Wiksells), p367
561:
562: \item Salpeter, E.~1961, \apj, 134, 669
563:
564: \item Stevenson, D.J.~1980, JPhys, 41, C2
565:
566: \item Weinberg, S.~1967, \prl, 19, 1264
567:
568: \item Winget, D.E., Hansen, C.J.~\& Van Horn, H.M.~1983, \nat, 303, 781
569:
570: \item Winget, D.E., Kepler, S.O., Robinson, E.L., Nather, R.E.~\&
571: O'Donoghue, D.~1985, \apj, 292, 606
572:
573: \item Winget, D.E.~et al.~1991, \apj, 378, 326
574:
575: \end{thebibliography}
576:
577: \end{document}
578: