1: \documentclass[11pt,fleqn]{article}
2: \usepackage{graphicx,multicol}
3: \textheight=21.4cm
4: \hoffset=-10mm
5: %\oddsidemargin=5mm
6: \textwidth=15cm
7: \parskip2pt
8: \begin{document}
9: \centerline{\LARGE\sf Neutrinos from galactic sources of cosmic rays}
10: \vskip1mm
11: \centerline{\LARGE\sf with known $\gamma$-ray spectra}
12: \vskip3mm
13: \centerline{Francesco Vissani}
14: \centerline{\em INFN, Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso, Assergi (AQ)}
15: \vskip4mm
16: \noindent{\footnotesize We describe a simple procedure to estimate
17: the high-energy neutrino flux from the observed $\gamma$-ray spectra
18: of galactic cosmic ray sources that are transparent to their
19: gamma radiation.
20: We evaluate in this way the neutrino flux from the supernova remnant
21: RX J1713.7-3946, whose very high-energy
22: $\gamma$-ray spectrum (assumed to be of hadronic origin)
23: is not a power law distribution according to H.E.S.S.\ observations.
24: The corresponding muon signal in neutrino telescopes is found to be about 5
25: events per km$^2$ per year in an ideal detector.}
26: \vskip1mm
27: \noindent{\footnotesize\em PACS: Neutrinos from CR 98.70.Sa;
28: Observations of $\gamma$-rays 95.85.Pw;
29: SNR in Milky Way 98.38.Mz.}
30:
31: \vskip2mm
32: \section{\sf Context and motivations}
33: The recent observations
34: of $\gamma$-rays above
35: TeV by H.E.S.S.\ are
36: of great interest \cite{hessSelected,hess}.
37: They will certainly help in answering
38: the old question of the origin of the cosmic rays till the knee
39: \cite{berez,gaisser,stanev,aharonian,pt} and
40: at the same time they could provide
41: us a reliable guidance for what we should expect in
42: neutrino telescopes, at least for certain sources.
43:
44: This is evident for the main candidate
45: sources of galactic cosmic rays, supernova remnants (SNR) \cite{baade,ginz}.
46: The huge kinetic energy of the gas of the SNR could be effectively converted
47: into cosmic rays by diffusive shock acceleration \cite{dsa}, producing
48: enough cosmic rays to compensate the losses from the Milky Way.
49: When the SNR is surrounded by matter that can act
50: as a target for cosmic rays, we would have a point source of
51: very high-energy (VHE)
52: gamma radiation, which seems in agreement with certain
53: observations. Since we expect that the matter around SNR is
54: not too dense anyway, the $\gamma$-rays are not significantly
55: absorbed, and there is a rather direct relation
56: between VHE $\gamma$-rays and neutrinos.
57:
58: More in general, we think that it is important
59: to take advantage of the detailed observations of $\gamma$-rays
60: whenever they exist in order to formulate definite
61: expectations for neutrino telescopes.
62: This is certainly true after the most recent H.E.S.S.\ observations,
63: that are beginning to find VHE $\gamma$-ray spectra that deviate
64: from power law distributions above 10 TeV or so \cite{hess}.
65:
66: Our recipe to calculate the neutrino fluxes is described
67: in Sect.\ \ref{2} and the application to the SNR
68: RX J1713.7-3946 is in Sect.\ \ref{3}.
69: In essence, these results are a straightforward application of standard
70: techniques \cite{lip} (and we follow as much as possible the
71: conventions of \cite{gaisser} to emphasise this fact)
72: but we hope that they are useful in the present moment, when
73: the high-energy gamma astronomy is flourishing and
74: the neutrino telescopes are finally becoming a reality.
75:
76:
77: \section{\sf Deriving the neutrino flux from the $\gamma$-ray flux\label{2}}
78: Let us assume that the VHE $\gamma$-ray flux
79: $F_\gamma$ observed from a certain source is of hadronic origin
80: and that it is not significantly absorbed--the source is
81: $\gamma$-transparent.\footnote{Therefore, this procedure is not of
82: direct application for a number of possible galactic sources
83: of neutrinos such as micro-quasars \cite{dist}
84: that are intrinsically non-transparent
85: or even for extragalactic sources since
86: the IR photons background absorbs the VHE gammas above
87: $\sim 10$ TeV; see also \cite{aaa}.} From
88: the well-known
89: relation $F_\gamma(E)=\int_E^\infty dE'\ 2\ F_{\pi^0}(E')/E'$
90: valid for high-energy $\gamma$-rays we find:
91: \begin{equation}
92: F_{\pi^0}(E)=-\frac{E}{2}\ \frac{dF_\gamma}{dE}
93: \end{equation}
94: that implies that the $\gamma$-ray flux has to be strictly
95: decreasing.
96: This equation, together with the approximate isospin-invariant distribution
97: of pions:
98: \begin{equation}
99: F_\pi \equiv F_{\pi^0}
100: \approx F_{\pi^+}\approx F_{\pi^-}
101: \end{equation}
102: permits us to predict the flux of neutrinos %from pions
103: using the observed $\gamma$-ray flux.
104: It is important to note that the
105: charge asymmetry has a small or negligible impact on the observable
106: $\nu_\mu$ flux, compare \cite{cost,asimm}.
107: The $\nu_\mu$ flux from the decay $\pi^+\to \mu^+ \nu_\mu$ is:
108: \begin{equation}
109: F_{\nu_\mu}(E) %=\int_{E/(1-r)}^\infty \frac{dE'}{1-r}\ \frac{F_\pi(E')}{E'}
110: =\frac{F_\gamma(E/(1-r))}{2(1-r)}
111: \label{nu1}
112: \end{equation}
113: where $r=(m_\mu/m_\pi)^2$.
114: The neutrinos from muon decay
115: $\mu^+\to \bar{\nu}_\mu \nu_e e^+$ have a more
116: implicit expression:
117: \begin{equation}
118: F_{\nu}(E_\nu)=
119: \int^1_0 \frac{dy}{y}\ F_\mu(E_\mu)\ ( g_0(y)- \bar{P_\mu}(E_\mu)\ g_1(y) )
120: \label{nu2}
121: \end{equation}
122: where $E_\mu = E_\nu/y$ and $g_i$ are known polynomials:
123: $g_0=5/3-3 y^2+4/3 y^3$
124: and $g_1=1/3-3 y^2+8/3 y^3$ when $\nu=\bar{\nu}_\mu$, while
125: $g_0=2-6 y^2+4 y^3$ and
126: $g_1=-2+12 y -18 y^2+8 y^3$ when $\nu={\nu}_e$ \cite{lip}.
127: The muon flux (from $\pi^+$) that appears in previous formula is:
128: \begin{equation}
129: F_\mu(E) %=\int_{E}^{E/r} \frac{dE'}{1-r}\ \frac{F_\pi(E')}{E'}
130: =\frac{F_\gamma(E)-F_\gamma(E/r) }{2(1-r)}
131: \end{equation}
132: while the muon polarisation averaged over the pion distribution is
133: given by:
134: %\begin{equation}
135: %\bar{P_\mu}(E) =
136: %-\frac{F_\gamma(E)+F_\gamma(E/r)}{F_\gamma(E)-F_\gamma(E/r)}+
137: %\frac{2 r}{1-r}\times \frac{\int_E^{E/r} F_\gamma(E')\
138: %{dE'}/{E}}{F_\gamma(E)-F_\gamma(E/r)}
139: %\end{equation}
140: \begin{equation}
141: \bar{P_\mu}(E)\times F_\mu(E) = -\frac{F_\gamma(E)+F_\gamma(E/r)}{2(1-r)}+
142: \frac{r}{(1-r)^2} \int_E^{E/r}\!\! F_\gamma(E')\ \frac{dE'}{E}
143: \end{equation}
144: It is easy to check that in the special case of power law distributions
145: these equations reproduce the results of Sect.~7.1 of \cite{gaisser}
146: (e.g., eq.~7.14 there).
147:
148: We include the contribution to $\gamma$ flux from $\eta\to \gamma \gamma$
149: (resp., the contribution to $\nu$ flux from the leptonic $K^\pm$ decay)
150: in the simplest conceivable approximation:
151: namely, we declare that the relevant flux of eta mesons (resp., the one of
152: charged kaons) is proportional to the one of the neutral pions
153: (resp., of the charged pions) with a fixed coefficient
154: $f_{\eta}= 10$~\% (resp.\ $f_K=25$ \% $\times 0.635$).
155: Thus:
156: (1)~all formulae above should be multiplied by $1/(1+f_\eta)$,
157: and then (2)~we add
158: a neutrino contribution that has the
159: same form as the one from charged pions,
160: but replacing $r = (m_\mu/m_K)^2$ and including
161: the multiplicative factor $f_K$.
162:
163:
164:
165:
166: Finally, we incorporate 3 neutrino oscillations replacing:
167: \begin{equation}
168: F_{\nu_\mu} \to F_{\nu_\mu}\ P_{\mu\mu} +F_{\nu_e}\ P_{e\mu}
169: \label{oosc}
170: \end{equation}
171: and the same for antineutrinos.
172: The numerical values of the oscillation probabilities are
173: $P_{\mu\mu}=0.39\pm 0.05$ and $P_{e\mu}=0.22\mp 0.05$ where
174: the quoted errors, approximately equal and opposite,
175: are mostly (0.04) due to the spread of $\theta_{23}$
176: around maximal mixing
177: and partly (0.02) to the spread
178: of $\theta_{13}$ around zero;
179: the effect of the
180: uncertainty in $\theta_{12}$ is smaller.
181: See \cite{cost} for more discussion,
182: \cite{nudata} for a resum\'e{} of neutrino
183: data and analysis, and \cite{rh} for further references.
184:
185:
186: We note in passing
187: a stricter condition on the behaviour of
188: the flux of VHE secondaries with the energy. Consider the
189: connection with the primary cosmic rays
190: $F_\pi(E)\propto \int_E^\infty dE' F_p(E') k(E/E')/E $,
191: that we assume for simplicity to be protons.
192: When we go from $E=E_1$ to $E=E_2$ with
193: $E_2>E_1$, the integral decreases because 1)~the lower limit increases;
194: 2)~the scaling distribution $k$ in the integrand is a decreasing
195: function; 3)~there is an explicit factor $1/E$.
196: Thus, also $f_\pi(E)\equiv E F_\pi(E)$ decreases.
197: The same can be said of
198: the function $f_\gamma(E)=E F_\gamma(E)$, since
199: $f_\gamma(E)=2\int_0^1 f_\pi(E/z) dz$; in other words the flux of
200: hadronic $\gamma$-rays decreases {\em at least} as $1/E$
201: at high energies.\footnote{Such a
202: very hard spectrum would follow from a hypothetical population
203: of very energetic primaries. In fact, consider $F_p(E')=\delta(E'-E_0)$:
204: when $E\ll E_0$ we find that the pions have $F_\pi(E)\propto 1/E$
205: since $k(0)\neq 0$; thus, the $\gamma-$rays would obey
206: the $1/E$ distribution.}
207:
208:
209: \section{\sf Application: neutrinos
210: from RX J1713.7-3946\label{3}}
211: We apply the formalism of the previous section to obtain the expected
212: neutrino flux from RX J1713.7-3946 on the basis of H.E.S.S.\ observations
213: \cite{hess}. We use 2 parameterisations of the $\gamma$-ray flux
214: that describe well the observations \cite{hess}:
215: \begin{equation}
216: F_\gamma(E) = \left\{
217: \begin{array}{ll}
218: 20.4\ E^{-1.98}\ \exp(-E/12)
219: & [\mbox{exponential cutoff}]\\[1ex]
220: 20.1\ E^{-2.06}\
221: [1+ (E/6.7)^{2.5}]^{-0.496} &
222: [\mbox{broken power law}]
223: \end{array}
224: \right.
225: \label{2f}
226: \end{equation}
227: where the units are TeV
228: for the energy $E$ and $10^{-12}/(\mbox{TeV cm$^2$ s})$ for the
229: flux $F_\gamma(E)$.
230: We do not use the third parametrization proposed
231: in \cite{hess}, $F_\gamma\propto E^{-2.08- 0.3 \log E}$,
232: namely the distribution with energy dependent photon index:
233: in fact, this cannot result from $\pi^0$s,
234: since this is just a Gaussian in the
235: logarithmic variable $\log E$, that increases
236: rather than decreasing before 40 GeV.
237: Note that a relatively low cutoff
238: implied by H.E.S.S.\ observations is consistent
239: with the present theoretical expectations \cite{bereze}
240: (however, rather different models of the same object
241: are also discussed \cite{malk}).
242: The result for muon neutrinos
243: according to formulae \ref{nu1}, \ref{nu2} and \ref{oosc}
244: is presented in figure \ref{figfig} and table \ref{tabtab};
245: in our approximation, the flux of antineutrinos is the same.
246: \begin{figure}[t]
247: \caption{\em Expected $\nu_\mu$ fluxes corresponding to the two
248: $\gamma$-ray spectra of eq.~\ref{2f}.\label{figfig}}
249: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=.52\textwidth,angle=270]{nu}}
250: \end{figure}
251:
252:
253:
254:
255: We can estimate the number of through-going events
256: in a neutrino telescope with $E_{th}=50$ GeV, $\phi=42^\circ 50'$ (ANTARES
257: location) following \cite{cost}.
258: Considering neutrinos
259: with energies below $E_{\nu,\rm max}=300$~TeV
260: (that is not a significant limitation),
261: we find:\footnote{The same numbers are obtained using
262: $F_{\nu_\mu}+F_{\bar{\nu}_\mu}=0.37 F_\gamma$.}
263: \begin{equation}
264: N_{\mu+\bar{\mu}}=\left\{
265: \begin{array}{ll}
266: \mbox{4.8 per km$^2$ per year} &\mbox{ [exponential cutoff] }\\
267: \mbox{5.4 per km$^2$ per year}&\mbox{ [broken power law]}
268: \end{array}
269: \right.
270: \label{rrr}
271: \end{equation}
272: that can be compared with $N_{\mu+\bar{\mu}}= 8.8$
273: of \cite{cost}, obtained assuming a power law distribution.
274: Thus, the new H.E.S.S.\ data suggest a signal about
275: 8 times weaker than given in~\cite{halzen}
276: (resp., 2 times weaker than in \cite{cost})
277: that adopted a power law distribution
278: extrapolated from the first observations of CANGAROO
279: (resp., of H.E.S.S.).
280:
281:
282:
283:
284: One can gain something if some
285: events above the horizon are accepted; e.g., with $5^\circ$ more,
286: one can go from a fraction of time useful for observation of
287: 78 \% (used for the numbers quoted in eq.~\ref{rrr})
288: to 88~\%{}. This is similar
289: to effects here neglected, e.g., other contributions of
290: $\eta$ and $K$ meson decays or the deviations
291: of $\theta_{23}$ from maximal mixing,
292: and should be comparable with the error of the method of calculation
293: we proposed. The effect of finite detection efficiency for
294: realistic detector configurations instead should be more important
295: (comparable with the effect of the deviation
296: from a power law distribution discussed
297: here) for the events are not expected to be particularly energetic:
298: the distribution of parent neutrino energies
299: has a median of 3 TeV for both distributions of eq.~\ref{2f}.
300:
301:
302:
303:
304:
305: \begin{table}[t]
306: \begin{caption} {\em $1^{st}$ line: selected values of neutrino energy.
307: $2^{st}$ line: sum of the yields of muons and antimuons (including
308: Earth absorption), times the reference
309: area $A=1$~km$^2$ and observation time $T=1$ year.
310: $3^{nd}$ and $4^{rd}$ line: the $F_{\nu_\mu}/F_\gamma$
311: ratio for the $\gamma$-ray fluxes of eq.~\ref{2f},
312: which varies significantly with the energy.
313: \label{tabtab}}
314: \end{caption}
315: \begin{center}
316: \begin{tabular}{c|cccccccc}
317: $E$ [TeV] & .1 & .3 & 1 & 3 & 10 & 30 & 100 & 300 \\
318: \hline \\[-2ex]
319: $A T (Y_\mu \! + \! Y_{\bar{\mu}} ) $ [cm$^2$ s]
320: & {\small $ 1.0\mbox{\tt\scriptsize E}{9} $}
321: & {\small $ 2.3\mbox{\tt\scriptsize E}{10} $}
322: & {\small $ 2.8\mbox{\tt\scriptsize E}{11} $}
323: & {\small $ 1.9\mbox{\tt\scriptsize E}{12} $}
324: & {\small $ 1.1\mbox{\tt\scriptsize E}{13} $}
325: & {\small $ 3.5\mbox{\tt\scriptsize E}{13} $}
326: & {\small $ 9.2\mbox{\tt\scriptsize E}{12} $}
327: & {\small $ 1.6\mbox{\tt\scriptsize E}{14} $} \\
328: %\hline
329: $F_{\nu_\mu}/F_\gamma$, exp.~cutoff& .26 & .26 & .25 & .21 & .14 & .06 & .02 & .01 \\
330: $F_{\nu_\mu}/F_\gamma$, brok.~power& .25 & .25 & .25 & .21 & .14 & .13 & .13 & .13 \\
331: \end{tabular}
332: \end{center}
333: \end{table}
334:
335:
336:
337:
338:
339: \section{\sf Summary and discussion}
340: In summary, we presented a simple procedure to convert the observations
341: of high-energy $\gamma$-rays into expectations for high-energy neutrinos,
342: assuming that the source is gamma-transparent and that the flux
343: of VHE
344: $\gamma$-ray is due to cosmic ray interactions (=it is of hadronic
345: origin). The latter hypothesis shows that our flux should be thought
346: as an upper bound for gamma-transparent sources.
347: As an application, we calculated the neutrino flux from RX J1713.7-3946
348: expected on the basis of new H.E.S.S.\ results and found that
349: the expected number of events decreases by $40-50$~\%
350: and that the signal consists of relatively low energy
351: events.
352:
353:
354:
355: In the future, it will be interesting to
356: repeat the same steps for other intense sources of VHE $\gamma$-rays,
357: e.g., Vela Jr (RX J0852.0-4652), that is almost
358: continuously visible from ANTARES (95~\% of time).
359: In the region $E\le 10$~TeV \cite{hessSelected}
360: the spectrum is described by $F_\gamma=21\ E^{-2.1}$
361: (same units as in eq.~\ref{2f}).
362: Suppose that the future observations will demonstrate
363: a milder exponential cutoff, described by a multiplicative
364: factor $\exp(-E/E_{\rm cut})$ with $E_{\rm cut}=50\ (150)$ TeV.
365: In this case we
366: would find $N_{\mu+\bar{\mu}}=10$ (14) events per km$^2$ per year
367: with a median neutrino energy of 5.5 (8.5) TeV (if, again,
368: we assume that all $\gamma$-rays are hadronic).
369: If instead RX J1713.7-3946 should turn out to
370: represent a typical SNR in a typical stage, it will be important
371: to understand the cosmic rays from a few hundred TeV till the knee,
372: e.g., considering other galactic point sources of cosmic rays
373: and/or further phases of cosmic ray acceleration.
374:
375:
376:
377: These results emphasise even further the importance
378: to obtain $\gamma$-ray
379: observations in the region from 10 to 100 TeV
380: and to understand well the experimental background coming from atmospheric
381: neutrinos.
382:
383:
384:
385: %\section*{\sf Acknowledgments}
386: \vskip4mm
387: \noindent We gratefully thank
388: F.~Aharonian,
389: V.~Berezinsky,
390: P.L.~Ghia,
391: D.~Grasso and especially
392: P.~Lipari
393: for useful discussions and
394: M.L.~Costantini for help.
395:
396: \section*{Note added} After this work
397: was submitted for publication and when it was presented
398: at Vulcano 2006 conference (May 2006),
399: a number of interesting new works appeared: \cite{lipari}
400: where the background and possible strategies for neutrino search
401: are quantitatively discussed; \cite{aro}, where a
402: detailed parameterizations of neutrino and gamma yields is offered;
403: \cite{uli}, where neutrinos events from Vela Jr are
404: estimated (though, without describing the details of the
405: calculation) using a fixed $\nu/\gamma$
406: conversion coefficient $=1/2$.
407: %\newpage
408:
409: \begin{footnotesize}
410: %\begin{twocolumn}
411: \def\refname{\sf References}
412: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
413: \bibitem{hessSelected} See e.g.,
414: H.E.S.S. Collaboration,
415: Astron.\ Astrophys.\ {437} (2005) L7, ibid.\ 95, ibid.\ 135;
416: Astron.\ Astrophys.\ {439} (2005) 1013;
417: Astrophys.J.636 (2006) 777
418: \bibitem{hess} F.~Aharonian {\it et al.} [The HESS Collaboration],
419: {\em A detailed spectral and morphological study of the gamma-ray supernova
420: remnant RX J1713.7-3946 with HESS,}
421: Astron.\ Astrophys.\ {449} (2006) 223
422: \bibitem{berez} V.S~Berezinsky, S.V.~Bulanov,
423: V.A.~Dogiel, V.L.~Ginzburg (ed.), V.S.~Ptuskin,
424: {\em Astrophysics of cosmic rays}, (1990, Russian edition
425: 1984) North Holland
426: \bibitem{gaisser} T.K~Gaisser, {\em Cosmic rays and particle physics}
427: (1990) Cambridge Univ. Pr.
428: \bibitem{stanev} T.~Stanev, {\em High energy cosmic rays}
429: (2003) Springer
430: \bibitem{aharonian} F.~Aharonian,
431: {\em Very high energy cosmic $\gamma$ radiation} (2004) World Scientific
432: \bibitem{pt} V.S.~Ptuskin, {\em Origin of galactic cosmic rays:
433: sources, acceleration, and propagation},
434: Rapporteur talk at
435: 29th ICRC (2005) 10, 317
436: \bibitem{baade}
437: W. Baade, F. Zwicky, Phys. Rev. 45 (1934) 138
438: \bibitem{ginz}
439: V.L. Ginzburg, S.I. Syrovatsky,
440: {\em Origin of Cosmic Rays} (1964)
441: Moscow
442: \bibitem{dsa} For reviews see L.O'C.~Drury et al., Space Sci.\
443: Rev.\ 99 (2001) 329; M.A.~Malkov, L.O'C.~Drury,
444: Rep.\ Prog.\ in Physics 64 (2003) 429;
445: A.M.~Hillas, J.~Phys. G, Nucl. Part. Phys. 31 (2005) R95
446: \bibitem{lip} P.~Lipari as quoted in the
447: caption of tab.~7.2 of \cite{gaisser}. See also
448: L.V.~Volkova, Proceedings of Erice 1988 {\em
449: Cosmic $\gamma$-rays, neutrinos, and related astrophysics} page 139 and
450: S.M.~Barr, T.K.~Gaisser, P.~Lipari and S.~Tilav,
451: Phys.\ Lett.\ {B214} (1988) 147
452: \bibitem{dist} C.~Distefano, D.~Guetta, E.~Waxman and A.~Levinson,
453: Astrophys.\ J.\ {575} (2002) 378. See
454: W.~Bednarek, G.F.~Burgio and T.~Montaruli,
455: New Astron.\ Rev.\ {49} (2005) 1 for
456: a review of possible galactic neutrino sources
457: \bibitem{aaa} H.E.S.S.\ Collaboration, Nature 440 (2006) 1018
458: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0508073;%%
459: \bibitem{cost} M.L.~Costantini and F.~Vissani,
460: %``Expected neutrino signal from supernova remnant RX J1713.7-3946 and flavor
461: %oscillations,''
462: Astropart.\ Phys.\ {23} (2005) 477
463: \bibitem{asimm} V.~Cavasinni, D.~Grasso and L.~Maccione,
464: %``TeV neutrinos from supernova remnants embedded in giant molecular clouds,''
465: astro-ph/0604004
466: \bibitem{nudata} A.~Strumia and F.~Vissani,
467: %``Implications of neutrino data circa 2005,''
468: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {726} (2005) 294 and hep-ph/0606054;
469: G.L.~Fogli, E.~Lisi, A.~Marrone and A.~Palazzo, hep-ph/0506083
470: \bibitem{rh} S.M.~Bilenky and B.~Pontecorvo,
471: Phys.\ Rept.\ {41} (1978) 225;
472: J. Learned and S. Pakvasa,
473: Astroparticle Phys. 3 (1995) 267;
474: R.M.~Crocker, F.~Melia, R.R.~Volkas,
475: Astroph.J. Suppl. 130 (2000) 339;
476: H.~Athar, M.~Jezabek and O.~Yasuda,
477: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {62} (2000) 103007;
478: R.M.~Crocker, F.~Melia, R.R.~Volkas,
479: Astroph.J. Suppl. 141 (2002) 147;
480: J.F.~Beacom, N.F.~Bell, D.~Hooper, S.~Pakvasa, T.J.~Weiler,
481: Phys.Rev. D 68 (2003) 0930005
482: \bibitem{bereze}
483: E.G.~Berezhko and H.J.~Volk,
484: %``Theory of cosmic ray production in the supernova remnant RX J1713.7-3946,''
485: astro-ph/0602177
486: \bibitem{malk}
487: M.A.~Malkov, P.H.~Diamond and R.Z.~Sagdeev,
488: %``On the gamma-ray spectra radiated by protons accelerated in SNR shocks near
489: %molecular clouds: The case of SNR RX J1713.7-3946,''
490: Astrophys.\ J.\ 624 (2005) L37
491: \bibitem{halzen} J.~Alvarez-Muniz and F.~Halzen,
492: Astrophys.\ J.\ {576} (2002) L33
493:
494: \bibitem{lipari} P.~Lipari,
495: %``Perspectives of high energy neutrino astronomy,''
496: astro-ph/0605535
497: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0605535;%%
498:
499: \bibitem{aro}
500: S.~R.~Kelner, F.~A.~Aharonian and V.~V.~Bugayov,
501: %``Energy spectra of gamma-rays, electrons and neutrinos produced at proton
502: %proton interactions in the very high energy regime,''
503: astro-ph/0606058
504: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0606058;%%
505:
506: \bibitem{uli}
507: U.F.~Katz,
508: %``KM3NeT: Towards a km**3 Mediterranean neutrino telescope,''
509: astro-ph/0606068
510: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0606068;%%
511:
512: \end{thebibliography}
513: %\end{twocolumn}
514:
515: \end{footnotesize}
516:
517: \end{document}
518: