1: %%%%%%Nov 22%%%%%latex file%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
3:
4: %\usepackage{epsf,epsfig}
5: \usepackage{graphicx}
6: \usepackage{cite}
7:
8: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-0.05cm}
9: \setlength{\textwidth}{16.5cm}
10: \setlength{\topmargin}{-1.25 cm}
11: \setlength{\textheight}{21.5cm}%
12:
13: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
14: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
15: \def\ba{\begin{eqnarray}}
16: \def\ea{\end{eqnarray}}
17: \def\la{~\mbox{\raisebox{-.6ex}{$\stackrel{<}{\sim}$}}~}
18: \def\ga{~\mbox{\raisebox{-.6ex}{$\stackrel{>}{\sim}$}}~}
19: \def\bq{\begin{quote}}
20: \def\eq{\end{quote}}
21: \def\PL{{ \it Phys. Lett.} }
22: \def\PRL{{\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} }
23: \def\NP{{\it Nucl. Phys.} }
24: \def\PR{{\it Phys. Rev.} }
25: \def\MPL{{\it Mod. Phys. Lett.} }
26: \def\IJMP{{\it Int. J. Mod .Phys.} }
27: \font\tinynk=cmr6 at 10truept
28: \newcommand{\bfx}{{\bf x}}
29: \newcommand{\bfy}{{\bf y}}
30: \newcommand{\bfr}{{\bf r}}
31: \newcommand{\bfk}{{\bf k}}
32: \newcommand{\bkp}{{\bf k'}}
33: \newcommand{\order}{{\cal O}}
34: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
35: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
36: \newcommand{\beqa}{\begin{eqnarray}}
37: \newcommand{\eeqa}{\end{eqnarray}}
38: \newcommand{\mpl}{M_{Pl}}
39: \newcommand{\lmk}{\left(}
40: \newcommand{\rmk}{\right)}
41: \newcommand{\lkk}{\left[}
42: \newcommand{\rkk}{\right]}
43: \newcommand{\lnk}{\left\{}
44: \newcommand{\rnk}{\right\}}
45: \newcommand{\Rbar}{\bar{R}}
46: \newcommand{\gbar}{\bar{g}}
47: \newcommand{\labell}[1]{\label{#1}\qquad_{#1}} %{\label{#1}} %
48: \newcommand{\labels}[1]{\vskip-2ex$_{#1}$\label{#1}} %{\label{#1}} %
49: %\renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}
50: \def\la{~\mbox{\raisebox{-.6ex}{$\stackrel{<}{\sim}$}}~}
51: \def\ga{~\mbox{\raisebox{-.6ex}{$\stackrel{>}{\sim}$}}~}
52:
53: \def\ltap{\ \raise.3ex\hbox{$<$\kern-.75em\lower1ex\hbox{$\sim$}}\ }
54: \def\gtap{\ \raise.3ex\hbox{$>$\kern-.75em\lower1ex\hbox{$\sim$}}\ }
55: \def\gl{\ \raise.5ex\hbox{$>$}\kern-.8em\lower.5ex\hbox{$<$}\ }
56: \def\roughly#1{\raise.3ex\hbox{$#1$\kern-.75em\lower1ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}
57:
58: \parskip 0.3cm
59: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
60: \begin{document}
61: \thispagestyle{empty}
62: \begin{flushright}
63: {\tt hep-ph/0302030} \\ CITA-2003-03
64: \end{flushright}
65: \vspace*{0.2cm}
66: \begin{center}
67: {\Large \bf Super-GZK Photons from Photon-Axion Mixing}\\
68: \vspace*{1cm}
69: {\large Csaba Cs\'aki$^{a}$,
70: Nemanja Kaloper$^{b}$,
71: Marco Peloso$^{c}$
72: and John Terning$^{d}$}
73:
74: \vspace{0.5cm}
75:
76: {\em $^a$ Newman Laboratory of Elementary Particle Physics}\\
77: {\em Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA}
78:
79: \vspace{0.2cm}
80:
81: {\em $^b$ Department of Physics, University of California}\\
82: {\em Davis, CA 95616, USA}
83:
84: \vspace{0.2cm}
85:
86: {\em $^c$ Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics, University of Toronto}\\
87: {\em 60 St.~George St., Toronto, ON M5S 3H8, Canada}
88: \vspace{0.2cm}
89:
90: {\em $^d$ Theory Division T-8, Los Alamos National Laboratory}\\
91: {\em Los Alamos, NM 87545 USA}\\
92: \vspace{0.2cm}
93: {\tt csaki@mail.lns.cornell.edu, kaloper@physics.ucdavis.edu,
94: peloso@cita.utoronto.ca, terning@lanl.gov}
95:
96: \vspace{1cm}
97: ABSTRACT
98: \end{center}
99: We show that photons with energies above the GZK cutoff can reach us
100: from very distant sources if they mix with light axions in extragalactic magnetic fields.
101: The effect which enables this is the conversion of photons into axions, which are
102: sufficiently weakly coupled to travel large distances unimpeded. These axions
103: then convert back into high energy photons close to the Earth. We show that
104: photon-axion mixing facilitates the survival of super-GZK photons
105: most efficiently with a photon-axion coupling scale $M \ga 10^{11}$ GeV,
106: which is in the same range as the scale for the photon-axion mixing explanation
107: for the dimming of supernovae without cosmic acceleration.
108: We discuss possible observational consequences of this effect.
109:
110: \vfill
111: \setcounter{page}{0}
112: %\setcounter{footnote}{0}
113: \newpage
114:
115: \section{Introduction}
116: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
117:
118: Observations suggest that
119: Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays (UHECRs) with
120: energies $\sim {\rm few} \times 10^{20} \,$ eV may exist in Nature
121: (for reviews, see e.g.
122: \cite{bhsi,nawa,aprs}). Usually it is assumed that such particles are
123: of astrophysical origin.\footnote{Alternatively, it
124: has been suggested that they may originate from the nearby decay of very
125: massive particles \cite{kuru,bkv} or topological defects \cite{hill}.}
126: While different candidate sources of UHECRs have been proposed, there is a
127: consensus that they should be at distances farther than ${\cal O}(100)\,$ Mpc.
128: Such distances are difficult to reconcile with the observed energies of UHECRs
129: in simple scenarios. Indeed, if the
130: UHECRs are protons, any flux above $\sim 5 \times 10^{19} \,$ eV --
131: the well-known Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin (GZK) cutoff \cite{gzk} --
132: is strongly attenuated by the photo-pion production on the Cosmic Microwave
133: Background (CMB) photons. If the UHECRs are photons, their flux is in turn
134: strongly attenuated by the scattering against the
135: extragalactic radio background, seemingly ruling them out as the candidates
136: for the highest energy UHECRs \cite{prjo}.
137:
138: A way around the GZK cutoff might be a mechanism where the cosmic
139: rays mostly consist of some very weakly interacting particles,
140: which could travel long distances without being significantly
141: absorbed. The only experimentally observed particles which could
142: do this are neutrinos. A few mechanisms with neutrinos as the
143: mediators, traveling most of the distance between a source and us
144: have been suggested. Such proposals, however, suffer from the
145: ``converse" problem: how does a sufficient fraction of the neutrinos
146: convert into nucleons or photons near the Earth. It has been
147: argued \cite{weiler,roulet,fargionweiler,ysl,fkr}
148: that, for neutrino masses of order eV, the
149: UHE neutrinos can interact significantly with the cosmological
150: background neutrinos through the $Z$ boson resonance. This
151: mechanism however may require very high incoming fluxes and a very
152: strong local clustering of the background neutrinos to conform
153: with the observations \cite{ysl}.
154:
155: It is therefore natural to ask if other particles (from
156: beyond the standard model (SM) of particle physics) could be such mediators.
157: Recently, pseudoscalars arising from the spontaneous breaking
158: of an axial symmetry, or axions for short (similar to the QCD-axion
159: \cite{axion}), have been considered in an alternative explanation for
160: the apparent dimming of distant type Ia supernovae (SNe) \cite{ckt}. The idea was
161: that a fraction of the photons emitted by a supernova could convert
162: into axions in the presence of an intergalactic magnetic field
163: en route to the Earth, thereby dimming the supernova and making it look farther
164: away than it is \cite{ckt}. Since these axions can travel
165: very far without significant interactions, and they can convert to photons (and vice-versa)
166: in background magnetic fields (see, e.g. \cite{osc}),
167: they are a natural candidate for a
168: mediator which could help evade the GZK cutoff.
169:
170: Ref. \cite{grs} investigated whether the QCD-axion, which could arise from a
171: solution of the strong CP problem \cite{axion}, could act as a
172: mediator of UHECRs. Because the photon-axion
173: coupling is of the form
174: \begin{equation}
175: \label{coupling}
176: \frac{a}{4 M} {\tilde F} \, F\ ,
177: \end{equation}
178: where $a$ is the axion field, and $F$ the electromagnetic field strength, the
179: evolution in the presence of a background magnetic field $B$ induces
180: ``flavor" (photon-axion)
181: conversions. The trilinear interaction (\ref{coupling}) gives rise to a
182: bilinear term which is not diagonal in ``flavor" space.
183: The probability for the photon-axion oscillation in a homogeneous magnetic field is
184: \begin{eqnarray}
185: P_{a \rightarrow \gamma} &=& \frac{1}{1+\frac{\Delta m^4 M^2}{4 \, {\cal E}^2 \,
186: B^2}} \, {\rm sin}^2 \left[ \frac{y}{2} \, \sqrt{
187: \frac{B^2}{M^2} + \frac{\Delta m^4}{4 \, {\cal E}^2}} \right] \,\,,
188: \label{prob} \\
189: \Delta m^2 &\equiv& m_\gamma^2 - m_a^2
190: \label{Deltam2}
191: \end{eqnarray}
192: where $m_\gamma$ is the effective photon mass in the intergalactic
193: plasma, $m_a$ is the axion mass, ${\cal E}$ the energy of the
194: particles, and $y$ the path length. For a QCD axion, $10^{-5} \,
195: {\rm eV} \la m_{a, {\rm QCD}} \la 10^{-1} \,$ eV, so the
196: conversion $a \rightarrow \gamma$ is completely negligible
197: \cite{grs}. One way around this problem pursued in~\cite{grs} was
198: to assume that the axion does not convert into photons, but that it
199: interacts with the Earth's atmosphere due to its
200: relatively large coupling to gluons. Here we
201: will follow a different direction. In the photon-axion model for
202: the dimming of the SNe a much lighter axion is invoked \cite{ckt}
203: (see also \cite{otherckt}). Then the axion mass will not suppress
204: the mixing even for the optical photons contributing to the SNe
205: luminosity, let alone for the UHECRs with energies larger by
206: nearly 20 orders of magnitude. This observation is the starting
207: point of this paper, where we will show that the coupled
208: photon-axion system could indeed give rise to the highest energy
209: cosmic rays. We will also compare the preferred region of the
210: parameter space where the transmission of ultra-high energy
211: photons is maximal to the parameters needed to explain the dimming
212: of the SNe, and show that the UHECR flux due to the photon-axion
213: mixing is especially enhanced for the choice of the parameters
214: needed to account for the SNe dimming in \cite{ckt}. Since the
215: mean free path $l_{\rm GZK}$ of the photons is very sensitive to
216: their energy, and since the energy of the UHECRs is nearly 20
217: orders of magnitude higher than the ones of the SNe, this
218: coincidence is very intriguing.
219:
220: Our model for the transmission of UHECRs works as follows.
221: Initially, a faraway astrophysical source releases a flux of very
222: high energy unpolarized photons. A small fraction of these photons
223: converts into axions before being depleted by the interactions
224: with the background (radio and CMB) photons\footnote{The photons
225: which do interact with the background photons give rise to
226: secondary photons which can also propagate along the beam with a
227: lower energy than the primary ones. To simplify the present
228: discussion we will neglect those and concentrate on particles
229: which have never interacted with the background photons.}. At
230: distances $d \gg l_{\rm GZK}$, defined as the mean free path of
231: the photons in absence of the mixing with axions, the beam is
232: mostly comprised of axions\footnote{Alternatively, one can start
233: with only axions from the very beginning, as in ref.~\cite{grs},
234: assuming that they are produced directly at the source.}. These
235: axions will gradually convert back into photons, but most of these
236: photons will be depleted by the interaction with background
237: photons. However, the conversion rate per distance traveled is
238: low, allowing most of the axions to travel unimpeded, and keep
239: replenishing the photon beam. This will ensure that a fraction of
240: the photons will survive over distances much larger than one would
241: expect from the GZK length of UHE photons.
242:
243: The paper is organized as follows: in Section 2 we describe the
244: evolution of the photon-axion system in the presence of the GZK
245: cutoff, making the (unrealistic) assumption of a homogeneous
246: magnetic field of order $\sim 10^{-9}$ Gauss. In this case the
247: evolution of the system can be calculated exactly, and we show
248: that there indeed exists a long-lived component in the photon
249: beam. In Section 3 we examine a more realistic situation, where
250: the magnetic field consists of domains of size $\sim$ Mpc, with a
251: random orientation of the field inside each domain, again with a
252: strength $\sim 10^{-9}$ Gauss \cite{magn}. We calculate the
253: surviving intensity of the photon beam as a function of the
254: distance traveled and the parameters of the photon-axion system,
255: and show that the highest survival probabilities are expected for
256: the same parameters that are preferred for the SNe dimming
257: mechanism of \cite{ckt}. We also discuss possible peculiar
258: signatures of this UHECR mediation mechanism arising from the fact
259: that most of the observed photons would be generated from a
260: predominantly axion beam within the last few magnetic domains
261: around the Earth. We estimate the initial photon flux needed for
262: this mechanism to work, and finally conclude in Section 4.
263:
264:
265:
266: \section{Evolution of the photon-axion system}
267: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
268:
269: The evolution of the photon-axion system propagating along the $y$
270: direction is governed by
271: \be
272: \Bigl\{ \frac{d^2}{dy^2} + {\cal E}^2
273: + \pmatrix{ i \Gamma({\cal E}) & -i {\cal E} \frac{B}{M} \cr i
274: {\cal E} \frac{B}{M} & 0 \cr} \Bigr\} \pmatrix{ |\gamma\rangle \cr
275: |a\rangle \cr} = 0 \label{frice}
276: \ee
277: where we have Fourier-transformed the fields to the energy (${\cal E}$)
278: picture. Here $\vec B$ is the extra-galactic magnetic field and
279: $B = \vec e \cdot \vec B \sim | \vec B|$ is its projection on the
280: photon polarization $\vec e$. In a constant magnetic field
281: $|\gamma\rangle$ denotes the photon polarization component along
282: $\vec B$, $|a\rangle$ the axion, while the photon polarization
283: $|\gamma_\perp\rangle$ orthogonal to $\vec B$ decouples from
284: $\vert a \rangle$ and evolves independently. In the next section
285: we will discuss the evolution of the photon-axion beam through a
286: sequence of domains with a different orientation of the magnetic
287: field in each domain, where both photon polarizations must be
288: retained. In both cases we take $|\vec B| \sim {\rm few} \cdot
289: 10^{-9}$ G. Throughout our analysis we can ignore the axion mass
290: and the effective photon mass, since they are much
291: smaller\footnote{We assume that $m_a^2 \ll {\cal E} \, B / M$;
292: this ensures that the photon-axion oscillations are unsuppressed,
293: but also excludes the QCD axion.} than the beam energy ${\cal E}
294: \sim 10^{20} eV$, and $ {\cal E} \, B / M$. Instead we include the
295: (energy dependent) decay rate $\Gamma$, which parameterizes the
296: decrease of the photon intensity due to their interaction with the
297: background photons. If we rewrite $\Gamma \sim {\cal E}/l_{\rm
298: GZK}$, in the absence of the coupling to the axions $l_{\rm GZK}$
299: gives the mean free path of the photons. For ${\cal E} = 3 \cdot
300: 10^{20} eV$ (which we will consider in our numerical examples
301: later on), $l_{\rm GZK} \simeq 6.4 \,$ Mpc~\cite{prjo}.
302:
303: For a constant $B$, the solution of Eqs. (\ref{frice}) is
304: \begin{eqnarray}
305: \left( \begin{array}{c}
306: |\gamma\rangle \\ |a\rangle \end{array} \right) &=&
307: \left( \begin{array}{cc}
308: \frac{1+\sqrt{1-4 \delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} &
309: -\,\frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \\
310: \frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} &
311: -\,\frac{1-\sqrt{1-4 \delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \end{array} \right)
312: \, {\rm e}^{i\,{\cal E}\,y+\lambda_1 \, y} \,
313: \left( \begin{array}{c}
314: |\gamma\rangle \\ |a\rangle \end{array} \right)_0 + \nonumber\\
315: &+& \left( \begin{array}{cc}
316: -\,\frac{1-\sqrt{1-4 \delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} &
317: \frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \\
318: -\,\frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} &
319: \frac{1+\sqrt{1-4 \delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \end{array} \right)
320: \, {\rm e}^{i\,{\cal E}\,y+\lambda_2 \, y} \,
321: \left( \begin{array}{c}
322: |\gamma\rangle \\ |a\rangle \end{array} \right)_0 \,\,,
323: \label{sol2}
324: \end{eqnarray}
325: where the subscript zero denotes the initial amplitudes at the source at $y=0$,
326: and where we use
327: \begin{eqnarray}
328: \lambda_1 &\equiv& - \, \frac{1}{4\,l_{\rm GZK}} \, \left[ 1 +
329: \sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2} \right] \,\,,\nonumber\\
330: \lambda_2 &\equiv& - \, \frac{1}{4\,l_{\rm GZK}} \, \left[ 1 -
331: \sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2} \right] \,\,,\nonumber\\
332: \delta &\equiv& \frac{B\,l_{\rm GZK}}{M} \simeq 0.11 \, \left( \frac{B}{1
333: \,{\rm nG}} \right) \, \left( \frac{10^{11} \, {\rm GeV}}{M} \right) \,
334: \left( \frac{l_{\rm GZK}}{\rm Mpc} \right) \,\,. \label{deltaref}
335: \end{eqnarray}
336: Notice that (\ref{sol2}) is regular for all values of $\delta$.
337: One can see this by rewriting (\ref{sol2}) as
338: \begin{eqnarray}
339: &&\left( \begin{array}{c}
340: |\gamma\rangle \\ |a\rangle
341: \end{array} \right) = {\rm e}^{i {\cal E} y} \,
342: {\rm e}^{-\frac{y}{4 l_{\rm GZK}}} \,
343: \left( \begin{array}{cc}
344: {\cal C} - {\cal S} & 2 \, \delta {\cal S} \\
345: - 2 \, \delta {\cal S} & {\cal C} + {\cal S}
346: \end{array} \right) \,
347: \left( \begin{array}{c}
348: |\gamma\rangle \\ |a\rangle
349: \end{array} \right)_0 \nonumber\\
350: && {\cal C} \equiv {\rm cosh } \left[ \sqrt{1-4 \delta^2} \frac{y}{4
351: l_{\rm GZK}} \right] \;\;,\;\;
352: {\cal S} \equiv \frac{{\rm sinh } \left[ \sqrt{1-4 \delta^2} \frac{y}{4
353: l_{\rm GZK}} \right]}{\sqrt{1-4 \delta^2}} \,\,,
354: \end{eqnarray}
355: with ${\cal C}$ and ${\cal S}$ real numbers for any choice of
356: $\delta\,$.
357:
358: We are interested
359: in the mean free path of the photons in the presence of the coupling to the axions.
360: The initial photon beam is taken to be composed of unpolarized photons, that is it contains
361: an equal mixture of $|\gamma\rangle$ and $|\gamma_\perp\rangle$,
362: with the total intensity normalized to unity. Then the intensities of the
363: surviving photons and axions after the distance $y$ away from the source,
364: using eq. (\ref{sol2}) $I_\gamma$ and $I_a$ are
365: \begin{eqnarray}
366: I_\gamma &=& \frac{1}{2} \left\{ {\rm e}^{-\frac{y}{l_{\rm GZK}}} +
367: \frac{1}{4\,\left( 1-4 \delta^2 \right)} \, \left[ \left(1+\sqrt{1-4
368: \delta^2}\right) \, {\rm e}^{-\frac{1+\sqrt{1-4 \delta^2}}{4\,l_{\rm GZK}}y}
369: \right. \right.
370: \nonumber \\
371: &&
372: \left. \left.
373: - \left(1-\sqrt{1-4 \delta^2}\right) \, {\rm e}^{-\frac{1-\sqrt{1-4
374: \delta^2}}{4\,l_{\rm GZK}}y} \right]^2\right\} \, , \nonumber\\
375: I_a &=& \frac{\delta^2}{2\left(1-4 \delta^2\right)} \, \left[
376: {\rm e}^{-\frac{1+\sqrt{1-4 \delta^2}}{4\,l_{\rm GZK}}y}-{\rm e}^{-\frac{1
377: -\sqrt{1-4 \delta^2}}{4\,l_{\rm GZK}}y} \right]^2 \,\,.
378: \label{ana1}
379: \end{eqnarray}
380: The first term in (\ref{ana1}) gives the intensity of the photons orthogonal
381: to $\vec B$, which do not mix with the axion and thus simply decay
382: away as is expected from the GZK mechanism,
383: while the remaining terms give the intensities of the coupled
384: axion-photon system. They have an easy interpretation both in the limit
385: of large and small $\delta$. For a large mixing ($\delta \gg 1$),
386: \begin{eqnarray}
387: I_\gamma &\simeq& \frac{1}{2} \, {\rm e}^{-\frac{y}{l_{\rm GZK}}} +
388: \frac{1}{2} \, {\rm e}^{-\frac{y}{2\,l_{\rm GZK}}} \, {\rm cos}^2 \left(
389: \frac{\delta y}{2\,l_{\rm GZK}} \right) \nonumber\\
390: I_a &\simeq& \frac{1}{2} \, {\rm e}^{-\frac{y}{2\,l_{\rm GZK}}} \, {\rm sin}^2
391: \left( \frac{\delta y}{2\,l_{\rm GZK}} \right) \, .
392: \label{large}
393: \end{eqnarray}
394: This displays the presence of an eigenstate which rapidly oscillates between the
395: original
396: $|\gamma\rangle$ and $|a\rangle$ states. In terms of the original parameters,
397: the oscillation length is $L_{\rm osc} \sim M/B$ and, not surprisingly,
398: it is independent of $l_{\rm GZK}$. Thus, $\delta \sim l_{\rm GZK}/L_{\rm osc}$
399: gives the number of the photon-axion oscillations within the
400: mean free path $l_{\rm GZK}$. Thus we can view the coupled
401: system as particles which are photon-like half of the time, and axion-like
402: half of the time, so that their probability to interact with the
403: background photons is one-half of the probability of the decoupled photons
404: $|\gamma_\perp\rangle$. This explains why
405: the mean free path of this state is $2 l_{\rm GZK}$.\footnote{In the case of a
406: magnetic field randomly oriented along different domains and of a strong
407: mixing $\delta$, we find numerically a mean free path of $3 l_{\rm GZK}/2$,
408: showing that the quanta
409: are equally ''shared'' between the axion and the two photon polarizations
410: states.}
411:
412: In the case of small mixing, $\delta \ll 1$, eq.~(\ref{ana1})
413: reduces to
414: \begin{eqnarray}
415: I_\gamma &\simeq& \frac{1}{2} \, {\rm e}^{-\frac{y}{l_{\rm GZK}}} +
416: \frac{1}{2 \left(1-4 \delta^2 \right)} \left[ \left(1-\delta^2 \right)
417: {\rm e}^{-\frac{1-\delta^2}{2 l_{\rm GZK}}y} -\delta^2
418: {\rm e}^{-\frac{\delta^2 y}{2\,l_{\rm GZK}}}
419: \right]^2 \nonumber\\
420: I_a &\simeq& \frac{\delta^2}{2} \left[{\rm e}^{-\frac{y}{2\,l_{\rm GZK}}}-
421: {\rm e}^{-\frac{\delta^2 y}{2 l_{\rm GZK}}}
422: \right]^2 \, .
423: \label{small}
424: \end{eqnarray}
425: This shows the presence of a long-lived mode,
426: characterized by the mean free path $l_{\rm GZK} / \delta^2 \gg l_{\rm GZK}$.
427: To see how it arises, we consider a simple example depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1},
428: where we plot $I_{\gamma,a}$ as functions of $y$, taking the
429: parameters: $l_{\rm GZK} = 6.4 {\rm Mpc}, \, B = 1 {\rm nG}, \,
430: M=4 \cdot 10^{11}$ GeV (this value of the photon-axion coupling
431: is close to its experimental bound \cite{bound})
432: corresponding to $\delta \simeq 0.18$. These are also the values of
433: $B$ and $M$ that have been used in~\cite{ckt}.
434: \begin{figure}
435: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.45\hsize,angle=-90]{fnew1}}
436: %\psfig{file=fnew1.eps,width=.5\textwidth}
437: \caption{Intensity in photons (initial normalization
438: $I_\gamma =1$)
439: and axions traveling
440: along a constant magnetic field over a distance of $300\,$ Mpc.}
441: \label{fig:fig1}
442: \end{figure}
443: The photon intensity $I_\gamma$ initially decreases\footnote{We
444: neglect the secondary photons formed by the scattering of the primaries
445: against the background photons.} as ${\rm exp} \left( - y / l_{\rm GZK}
446: \right)\,$.
447: Meanwhile, some photons convert into axions, and the intensity $I_a$ (initially
448: taken to be zero\footnote{This is a conservative assumption, since if
449: initial axions
450: are also produced
451: at the source, then our mechanism will still work, the only difference being
452: that the required
453: sources can have lower intensities.}) increases. For a small mixing, the
454: quantity $\delta \sim l_{\rm GZK}/L_{\rm osc}$
455: gives the amplitude for the process $|\gamma\rangle \rightarrow |a\rangle$ to
456: occur
457: within the mean free path of the photons. Thus, $\delta^2$ is
458: approximately the fraction of the original photons which
459: converts into axions before being depleted by the interaction with the
460: background photons. This is confirmed by Eq.~(\ref{small})
461: and by the numerical evolution shown, which indicate that the axion
462: intensity peaks at $\sim \delta^2$. From this point on, $I_a > I_\gamma$
463: and the subsequent photon-axion oscillations lead to a decrease of $I_a$.
464: The number of axions decreases by a fraction $\delta^2$ per each distance
465: $\Delta y = l_{\rm GZK}$ traveled. To leading order in $\delta^2$,
466: this effect is not compensated by those photons which convert back into axions,
467: since in the case of small mixing the photons in the
468: beam are more likely to be dissipated by the background photons
469: than oscillate back into axions. Thus, $I_a \propto I_{a,max} \left( 1 -
470: \delta^2 \right)^{y/l_{\rm GZK}} \sim
471: \delta^2 {\rm exp} \left( - \delta^2 y/l_{\rm GZK} \right)$.
472:
473: This argument explains the presence of an
474: eigenstate with the mean free path
475: $l_{\rm GZK} /\delta^2 \gg l_{\rm GZK}$ in Eq.~(\ref{small}).
476: The axion intensity in this mode relative to the total initial photon intensity
477: is small, of order $\delta^2$, due to the small
478: probability for $|\gamma\rangle
479: \rightarrow |a\rangle$ oscillations. The photon-like component of this mode is
480: suppressed by a further power of $\delta^2$, because these photons arise from
481: the double conversion $|\gamma\rangle \rightarrow |a\rangle \rightarrow
482: |\gamma\rangle$. Most of these photons disappear quickly,
483: within a distance $y \sim l_{\rm GZK}$ because of the interaction with
484: background photons. However, the incessant conversion of the surviving
485: axions in the beam back into photons provides for a long-lasting source of
486: photons, yielding a slowly decreasing photon
487: intensity $I_\gamma \sim \delta^4 {\rm exp} \left( - \delta^2 y/l_{\rm GZK}
488: \right)$. The rise of this ``second population"
489: of photons is clearly visible in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1}. The distance $y_*$ at
490: which these photons reach the level of the surviving intensity of the primary
491: photons in the beam which never underwent any interactions is roughly given by
492: $e^{-y_*/l_{GZK}} \simeq \delta^4$. In the present example, $y_*
493: \simeq 45 $ Mpc, in good agreement with the value shown in the figure.
494:
495:
496: \section{Consequences for the UHECR}
497: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
498:
499: Until now we have considered the evolution of the photon-axion system in a
500: constant magnetic field. However, the intergalactic magnetic field is
501: unlikely to be completely uniform. Instead, it is more reasonable
502: to take the magnetic fields with a strength close to the observed upper bound
503: of few $\times 10^{-9}$ G to be homogeneous within domains
504: of a typical size $\sim$ Mpc \cite{magn}, but with their orientation
505: randomly varying from domain to domain (the same assumptions
506: were made in \cite{ckt}). We will now look at the
507: evolution of the photon-axion beam in such a universe.
508: Photons with polarization perpendicular to ${\vec B}$ do not couple to
509: axions, so the photon-axion mixing involves photons whose helicity changes
510: from domain to domain \cite{osc}. If it were
511: not for the interaction with the background photons, the quanta in the beam would
512: be roughly equipartitioned between
513: the axion component and the two photon polarizations after traversing
514: several domains. This is what is expected
515: to happen to the visible
516: photons released in SNe explosions, as explained in
517: \cite{ckt}. For the range of energies we are interested in, the
518: interaction with the background photons cannot be neglected, and so the depletion
519: effect described in the previous section must be taken into account.
520:
521: It is easy to extend the formulae from the previous section to the general
522: situation. If the beam is still taken to travel along the $y$ direction, it
523: can be described by a vector in the basis $\left( \vert \gamma_x \rangle ,\,
524: \vert \gamma_z \rangle ,\, \vert a \rangle \right)\,$, where $\vert
525: \gamma_{\left\{ x,z \right\}} \rangle$ denote photons polarized along the
526: $\left\{ x,z \right\}$ axis. Inside each domain, the transfer matrix is such
527: that it can be rotated to the $ 2 \times 2$ matrix~(\ref{sol2}) for the
528: coupled axion-photon components, plus a third term ${\rm exp } \left(
529: - y / 2 \, l_{\rm GZK} \right)$ describing the evolution of the decoupled
530: photon polarization orthogonal to ${\vec B}\,$.
531:
532:
533:
534: The resulting transfer equation is:
535: \begin{eqnarray}
536: \left( \begin{array}{c} \gamma_x \\ \gamma_z \\ a
537: \end{array} \right)
538: = {\rm e}^{i\,E\,y} \, \left[ \, T_0 \, {\rm e}^{\lambda_0\,y}
539: +T_1 \, {\rm e}^{\lambda_1\,y} + T_2 \, {\rm e}^{\lambda_2\,y} \, \right] \,
540: \left( \begin{array}{c}
541: \gamma_x \\ \gamma_z \\ a
542: \end{array} \right)_0
543: \end{eqnarray}
544: where $\lambda_{1,2}$ have been given above,
545: \begin{equation}
546: \lambda_0 \equiv -\,\frac{1}{2\,l_{\rm GZK}} \,\,,
547: \end{equation}
548: and the three transfer matrices are
549: \begin{eqnarray}
550: T_0 &\equiv& \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
551: {\rm sin}^2 \theta & -\, {\rm cos} \theta \, {\rm sin} \theta & 0 \\
552: -\, {\rm cos} \theta \, {\rm sin} \theta & {\rm cos}^2 \theta & 0 \\
553: 0 & 0 & 0
554: \end{array} \right) \,\,, \\
555: T_1 &\equiv& \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
556: \frac{1+\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}
557: \, {\rm cos}^2 \theta &
558: \frac{1+\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}
559: \, {\rm cos} \theta \, {\rm sin} \theta &
560: -\,\frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \,{\rm cos} \theta \\
561: \frac{1+\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}
562: \, {\rm cos} \theta \, {\rm sin} \theta &
563: \frac{1+\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \, {\rm sin}^2 \theta &
564: -\,\frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \,{\rm sin} \theta \\
565: \frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \,{\rm cos} \theta &
566: \frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \,{\rm sin} \theta &
567: -\,\frac{1-\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}
568: \end{array} \right) \\
569: T_2 &\equiv& \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
570: -\,\frac{1-\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \, {\rm cos}^2 \theta &
571: -\,\frac{1-\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}
572: \, {\rm cos} \theta \, {\rm sin} \theta &
573: \frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \,{\rm cos} \theta \\
574: -\,\frac{1-\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}
575: \, {\rm cos} \theta \, {\rm sin} \theta &
576: -\,\frac{1-\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}
577: \, {\rm sin}^2 \theta &
578: \frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \,{\rm sin} \theta \\
579: -\,\frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \,{\rm cos} \theta &
580: -\,\frac{\delta}{\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}} \,{\rm sin} \theta &
581: \frac{1+\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}{2\,\sqrt{1-4\,\delta^2}}
582: \end{array} \right) ~,
583: \end{eqnarray}
584: with $\theta$ being the angle between the magnetic field and the $x$ axis.
585: The overall transfer matrix
586: is then simply the product of the transfer matrices in each domain.
587:
588: \begin{figure}
589: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.45\hsize,angle=-90]{arti}}
590: \caption{Evolution of the photon intensity across several domains with coherent
591: magnetic field of length $1$ Mpc each, for $l_{\rm GZK} = 6.4$ Mpc. The
592: horizontal axis indicates the distance from the source. The exact evolution is
593: compared to the case in which the intensity of photons is (artificially) set
594: to zero at $d=100$ Mpc. The two evolutions converge within a few $l_{\rm GZK}$
595: distances.}
596: \label{fig:fig2}
597: \end{figure}
598:
599: The evolution of the system is qualitatively similar to the one for a constant
600: magnetic field illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1}. However, the interference
601: effects modify the quantitative results whenever the domain size is
602: comparable to, or smaller than, the absorption length $l_{\rm GZK}\,$. For
603: example, consider the evolution of the photon intensity illustrated
604: in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig2}. The curve denoted ``exact evolution'' describes
605: $I_\gamma$ as a function of the distance from the source. All parameters are
606: as in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1} except that ${\vec B}$ is randomly oriented in
607: each domain. The random orientation of $\vec B$
608: is responsible for the stochastic character of $I_\gamma$ seen in the figure.
609: At these distances from the source the intensity in axions $I_a$ is much
610: greater than the one in photons, decreasing smoothly as in
611: Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1}. The overall intensity $I_\gamma+I_a$ is thus also smoothly
612: decreasing. By comparing the value of $I_\gamma$ of the two figures (recalling that
613: in both cases the photon intensity is normalized to unity at the source), one
614: notices that $I_\gamma$ is more suppressed by a randomly pointing ${\vec B}\,$.
615: This effect might be
616: interpreted as a decrease of the effective mixing parameter $\delta$.
617: As a consequence, fewer photons will convert into axions before being depleted
618: by the interaction with the background photons. However, for the very same reason,
619: the decrease of $I_\gamma$ at distances $\gg l_{\rm GZK}$ appears
620: to be much milder in the numerical simulations
621: than the one computed for a constant magnetic field.
622:
623:
624:
625: An interesting consequence for the transmission of UHECRs is that for
626: sufficiently distant sources the
627: only photons in the beam are the ones which have been generated by the axions
628: within the previous $\sim 4 - 5 \, l_{\rm GZK}\,$
629: distances. Otherwise they would have been depleted by the
630: interactions with the background photons.\footnote{We remark
631: that this concerns the {\it primary} photons, i.e.
632: the ones which have not interacted with the background photons.}
633: Since within each domain only the polarization along the magnetic
634: field is actually generated, the UHECRs reaching the Earth
635: would be very sensitive to the orientation of ${\vec B}$ in domains within the
636: sphere of radius $\sim 5 \, l_{\rm GZK}\,$ from us. Consequently the
637: incoming photons should have slightly different
638: polarizations along different lines of sight. The magnitude
639: of this effect depends on the relative size of the domains and on the value
640: of $l_{\rm GZK}$. If the beam crosses
641: several domains in the last few $l_{\rm GZK}$ distances, the
642: differences in the polarization may average out.
643:
644: We also note that the presence of domains of ${\vec B}$ with different orientation
645: along different lines of sight can lead to differences in the
646: intensities of UHECRs from different directions, even if the
647: distribution of sources were homogeneous and isotropic. This is because
648: only the magnetic field perpendicular to the line of
649: travel contributes to the photon-axion mixing in each domain. Thus, we expect lower
650: fluxes from regions in which the magnetic field is mostly oriented in the
651: direction pointing toward the Earth. At present there is not enough
652: experimental data about UHECRs and extragalactic magnetic fields
653: to enable us to test these predictions. However, this is a
654: very distinctive signature that may eventually be tested experimentally.
655: We illustrate these effects in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig2}, where we have artificially
656: removed the photons in the beam at a distance $d=100$ Mpc from the source, and
657: compared the subsequent evolution to the exact one, without this
658: artificial suppression. One can easily see that the two curves approach each
659: other within a few $l_{\rm GZK}$ distances.
660: Since in this case the evolution is stochastic, the curves themselves
661: behave very differently according to different random choices
662: for the orientations of ${\vec B} \,$. However, in
663: all the different simulations the two curves approach each other
664: very quickly, irrespectively of the particulars of the magnetic
665: configuration.
666:
667:
668: \begin{figure}
669: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.45\hsize]{contour3}}
670: \caption{Intensity of photons $I_\gamma$ (logarithmic units) from a single
671: source at a distance $d$ (given in Mpc on the vertical axis) for an arbitrary
672: value of $\delta$ (${\rm Log}_{10} \delta$ shown on the horizontal axis).
673: The intensity at the source is normalized to unity and different contour
674: lines are at $I_\gamma = 10^{-3} \,, 10^{-4} \,, \dots \,, 10^{-8}\,$. Darker
675: regions correspond to greater intensity.}
676: \label{fig:fig3}
677: \end{figure}
678:
679: In Fig.~\ref{fig:fig2} the mild decrease of the photon
680: intensity at large distances is hidden by its stochastic behavior. To see the
681: decrease, one has to average the evolution over several configurations of
682: ${\vec B}\,$. This averaging procedure is appropriate if we discuss
683: UHECRs independently of their arrival directions, which have crossed
684: different, uncorrelated configurations of the magnetic field. The remaining
685: figures that we show have been obtained using this averaging procedure.
686:
687: In Fig.~\ref{fig:fig3} we display the evolution of the photon
688: intensity as a function of the distance from the source (vertical
689: axis) and of the mixing parameter $\delta\,$ (horizontal axis). As
690: before $l_{\rm GZK}=6.4$ Mpc. The photon intensity drops rapidly
691: both at low and high values of $\delta\,$. We note that the
692: surviving photon intensity is maximized for $\delta$ between $\sim
693: 0.1$ and order unity. This gives the region of preferred values of
694: the photon-axion coupling parameter $M$ and the magnetic field $B$
695: where our mechanism is efficient (see Eq.~(\ref{deltaref})).
696: Interestingly, the choice of parameters adopted in~\cite{ckt} to
697: explain the SNe dimming in terms of the photon-axion conversion is
698: precisely within this region.
699:
700: \begin{figure}
701: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.45\hsize,angle=-90]{spe500}}
702: \caption{Photons from a source at $d=500\,$ Mpc from the Earth. The initial
703: spectrum is assumed to have an energy dependence $I_\gamma \propto E^{-\,3}$.
704: The spectrum of primary
705: photons
706: reaching the Earth is shown both with and without the photon-axion mixing.
707: See the main text for details.}
708: \label{fig:fig4}
709: \end{figure}
710:
711: Ultimately we would like to find how the photon-axion mixing
712: affects the spectrum of UHECRs observed on Earth. A precise
713: computation, which requires the inclusion of the secondary
714: particles produced when a photon in the beam interacts with a
715: background photon, is beyond the scope of this paper. However, a
716: rough but illustrative estimate can be obtained relatively simply.
717: We begin by considering an explicit example of the evolution of a
718: primary photon spectrum from a single source at $d=500\,$ Mpc from
719: the Earth, shown in Fig~\ref{fig:fig4}. The intensity at the
720: source is assumed to scale as $E^{-3}$ (the overall normalization
721: is irrelevant for the present discussion). Even without the mixing
722: with axions the spectrum of primary photons reaching the Earth is
723: strongly modified due to their interaction with the background
724: photons. The reason is that the mean free path $l_{\rm GZK}$ is
725: strongly dependent on their energy. For the energy range shown in
726: Fig.~\ref{fig:fig4}, it ranges from $\sim 0.3$ Mpc for $E =
727: 10^{18}$ eV up to $\sim 100$ Mpc for $E = 10^{22}$ eV (we have
728: used the results of~\cite{prjo} summarized in~\cite{aprs}, see
729: these references for details). The strong increase of $l_{\rm
730: GZK}$ in this interval explains why the second spectrum in the
731: figure is peaked at high energies, although the original
732: spectrum\footnote{The local maximum at $E \sim 2 \cdot 10^{19}$ eV
733: corresponds to a local maximum of $l_{\rm GZK}$, due to the fact
734: that at smaller energies the incoming photons are mostly affected
735: by CMB photons, while at higher energies they are most affected by
736: radio photons. See~\cite{prjo,aprs} for details.} scaled as
737: $E^{-3}\,$.The curves shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig4} confirm a much
738: lower depletion of primary photons when the mixing with axions is
739: taken into account (as in all the previous cases, the axion-photon
740: mass parameter is taken to be $M=4 \cdot 10^{11}$ GeV).
741:
742: \begin{figure}
743: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.45\hsize,angle=-90]{final2}}
744: \caption{Combined spectra of high energy protons and primary photons, for a
745: homogeneous and isotropic distribution of sources at distances between $100$
746: and $1000$ Mpc from the Earth. An energy dependence $I \propto E^{-\,3}$ is
747: assumed at the source. See the main text for details.}
748: \label{fig:fig5}
749: \end{figure}
750:
751: We finally relate this decreased depletion of
752: $I_\gamma$ to an apparent absence of a GZK cutoff in the UHECR spectrum. In
753: Fig.~\ref{fig:fig5} we combined a spectrum of protons of extragalactic origin
754: with the spectrum of primary photons. Both spectra have been computed for an
755: isotropic and homogeneous distribution of sources at distances $100 \,
756: {\rm Mpc} < d < 1000 \, {\rm Mpc}$ from the Earth. For both populations,
757: the intensity at the source is again taken to have a $I \propto E^{-3}$
758: dependence. Notice that the proton spectrum $I_p$ exhibits the GZK
759: cut-off,\footnote{For the proton evolution, we have followed the
760: results of~\cite{ades} summarized in~\cite{aprs}.} while -- due to their
761: coupling with the axions -- this is not the case for the photon spectrum
762: $I_\gamma\,$. By an appropriate relative choice of $I_p$ and $I_\gamma$ at
763: the source, it is thus possible to match the two spectra such that the
764: photon flux ``catches up'' precisely where the proton flux exhibits the GZK
765: cutoff. The overall spectrum can thus be extended at energies well above
766: $E_{\rm GZK}\,$.
767:
768: Before concluding, we stress the limitations of the computations summarized
769: in the last two figures. The main one is related to the fact that $I_\gamma$
770: does not include the secondary photons arising when the photons in
771: the beam scatter against the background photons. This will lead to
772: a significant modification of $I_\gamma$. Fig.~\ref{fig:fig5} has
773: been obtained for a ratio $I_\gamma / I_p = 25,000$ at the source.
774: This would amount to a flux of about $10^{-23} \, \left( m^2 \, sr
775: \, s \, GeV \right)^{-1}$ on Earth, if the photons were travelling
776: unimpeded. We expect that a smaller ratio will be required once
777: secondary photons are taken into account. Secondly, in all of the
778: above computations we have neglected the decrease of the energy
779: (with a consequent change of $l_{\rm GZK}$) of the quanta in the
780: beam due to the cosmological redshift (for sources at $d=1000$
781: Mpc, this correspond to about a $30 \%$ decrease of the energy).
782: Thus, the computation summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig5} should be
783: understood only as an order of magnitude estimate and as an
784: illustration of the effect which can be expected. The significance
785: of this estimate will be highly dependent on which sources for the
786: photons one is assuming. The problem of accelerating particles at
787: such energies in different astrophysical environments is completely
788: independent from the problem of their propagation across intergalactic
789: media. Thus it is sensible to separate these problems from each other.
790: Therefore in the present paper we have focused only on the latter,
791: the propagation problem.
792:
793: We close this section with a note on the nature of the UHECRs.
794: Once UHECRs hit the atmosphere of the Earth, they give rise to
795: extensive air showers. Different incident particles generate
796: distinct longitudinal profiles, that is the amount of particles as
797: a function of the amount of atmosphere penetrated by the cascade.
798: Several analyses, for example the one reported by the Fly's Eye
799: Collaboration in~\cite{eye}, suggest a change from an iron
800: dominated composition of the incoming particles at $ \sim 10^{17}$
801: eV to a proton dominated composition near $10^{19}$ eV. At higher
802: energies, the current statistics are too poor for a conclusive
803: claim, and one still cannot exclude photons as a relevant fraction
804: of UHECRs above the GZK cut-off \cite{ave,kkst,aprs}. The most
805: accurate method to determine the nature of UHECR of such energies
806: is the study of the muon content of inclined showers (that is, the
807: ones with incident zenith angle $\theta > 60^0\,$). The strongest
808: bounds quoted in the literature \cite{aprs} have been obtained in
809: \cite{ave}, where inclined air showers recorded by the Haverah
810: Park \cite{haverah} detector have been analyzed. The results of
811: \cite{ave} are affected by uncertainties in the parameterization
812: of the flux of cosmic rays. Assuming the parameterization given in
813: \cite{nawa}, the authors of \cite{ave} obtain that less than $48
814: \%$ of the observed events above $10^{19} \,$eV can be photons
815: with a $95 \%$ confidence level. For energies higher than $4
816: \times 10^{19} \,$eV, they find instead that the content of
817: photons has to be less than $50 \%$ of the overall flux. Different
818: results are obtained based on the parameterization given in the
819: more recent work \cite{sww}. The two upper bounds change to $25
820: \%$ for energies above $10^{19} \,$eV, while only to $70 \%$ for
821: energies greater than $4 \times 10^{19} \,$eV \cite{ave}.
822:
823: Hence, we see that a mixed composition of proton and photons in
824: the UHECR above the GZK cutoff is compatible with the present
825: experimental limits. Thus the mechanism we propose here is in
826: agreement with the data at the moment: it relies precisely on the
827: assumption that both protons and photons give a sizeable
828: contribution to the UHECR at energies around $10^{19} \,$eV. The
829: present experimental results do not yield clear-cut constraints at
830: higher energies, as manifested by the discrepancy between the
831: analysis based on the different parameterizations of \cite{nawa}
832: and \cite{sww}. On the contrary, the higher statistics and better
833: energy determination expected in the forthcoming Auger Observatory
834: \cite{auger} have the power of greatly improving the present
835: bounds. Therefore it may either discover photon UHECRs or yield
836: significantly stronger bounds on the dynamics of photon-axion
837: mixing we employ here. It will thus be of interest to subject the
838: mechanism we propose to more scrutiny.
839:
840: One more concern about photons being UHECRs could be that most of
841: the photons that do interact with the background (the secondary
842: photons) would cascade down to GeV energies and contribute to the
843: diffuse gamma ray background. If the survival probability of the
844: UHE photons were too low, then the model would have predicted too
845: many secondary photons and thus a gamma ray background that is too
846: large. The average survival probability from Fig.~\ref{fig:fig3}
847: for the optimal values of $\delta$ are of order $10^{-4}$. The
848: ratio of total energies contained in the 1 GeV gamma ray
849: background to the energies contained in UHECRs at $10^{20}$ eV can
850: be obtained from comparing the measured EGRET flux~\cite{EGRET} to
851: the various measurements of UHECR fluxes. This ratio turns out to
852: be of order $10^{-3} - 10^{-4}$, depending on whether a high or
853: low number for the UHECR flux is adopted. The lower value seems to
854: fit in our model very well, while for the higher value there could
855: seemingly be a marginal conflict (of at most an order of
856: magnitude) with the gamma ray background bounds. However, the
857: ratio of primary to secondary photons can be higher than the
858: survival probabilities in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig3} for various
859: different reasons. First, there could be an initial axion
860: component in the beam which would dramatically change the
861: prediction for the ratio of primary to secondary photons. Note
862: that if the initial beam contained an order unity fraction of the
863: energy in axions, the primary photon to secondary photon ratio
864: would also be of order unity. Thus it is clear that even a
865: relatively small admixture of axions in the initial beam can
866: drastically improve the primary to secondary photon ratio. Second,
867: the conversion rate within our galaxy is much larger since the
868: galactic magnetic field is $\sim 10^3$ times bigger than the
869: assumed value of the intergalactic magnetic field. If a somewhat
870: larger value of magnetic field persists for a few kiloparsecs,
871: then the survival probabilities will be increased by a factor of
872: few, and this on its own could be sufficient to bring down the
873: number of secondary photons. Lastly, as we have stressed above,
874: only a fraction of UHECRs may be photons. Then the total number of
875: secondary photons would fall below the diffuse gamma ray bounds
876: even if the primary to secondary photon ratio stays the same. In
877: this way the signatures of our mechanism would still persist
878: without any violations of the diffuse gamma ray background bounds.
879:
880:
881: Finally, a photon component of UHECRs may be related to the
882: modification of their spectrum by the interaction with the
883: background photons, once the secondary photons are also taken into
884: account in the propagation codes. After scattering with the
885: background photons, an incoming photon of energy ${\cal E}_0$
886: produces secondary photons which accumulate at energies $< {\cal
887: E}_0\,$. Starting with some flux at the source and normalizing the
888: final spectrum to the observed amount of events above the GZK
889: cutoff, one would typically find an excess of events at lower
890: energies \cite{prjo}. However here the mixing with the axions can
891: significantly modify the final spectrum precisely in the direction
892: of ``balancing out'' this excess at lower energies. Indeed, the
893: energy of the photons continuously supplied by the axions is given
894: by the initial energy at the source decreased only by the
895: expansion of the Universe, and it is greater than that of the
896: secondary photons present in the beam. A detailed computation of
897: the final spectrum, including both primary and secondary photons
898: will be an important test of the viability of the mechanism
899: proposed here.
900:
901: \section{Conclusions}
902: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
903:
904: An interesting property of axions, which arise in many extensions of
905: the SM, is that they mix with photons in an external magnetic
906: field. Photon-axion conversions in extragalactic magnetic fields can
907: have relevant consequences for astrophysics and cosmology. We have
908: shown that the same parameters (axion mass, coupling scale, magnetic
909: field configurations) which provide an alternative explanation for the
910: dimming of distant SNe \cite{ckt} could also imply an enhancement of
911: the flux of super-GZK photons arriving to the Earth from faraway
912: sources. Whether this enhancement is observable clearly depends on the
913: distribution of the sources and on the intensity of the high-energy
914: photon spectrum they emit. We have seen here that, for realistic
915: assumptions, super-GZK photons can be detectable, and may provide an
916: explanation for the origin of super-GZK events in the UHECR spectrum,
917: if the required sources of very high energy photons exist. The
918: viability of this mechanism can be tested by improved simulations of
919: the photon propagation, and ultimately by the increase of UHECR data
920: expected over the next few years.
921:
922: \section*{Acknowledgments}
923: We thank J. Arons, J. Feng, H.P. Nilles, and G. Raffelt for useful
924: discussions, and to Dimitry Semikoz for useful comments on the
925: manuscript. C.C. is supported in part by the DOE OJI grant
926: DE-FG02-01ER41206 and in part by the NSF grant PHY-0139738. N.K.
927: is supported in part by a Research Innovation Award from the
928: Research Corporation. J.T. is supported by the U.S. Department of
929: Energy under contract W-7405-ENG-36.
930:
931: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
932:
933:
934: \bibitem{bhsi}
935: P.~Bhattacharjee and G.~Sigl,
936: %``Origin and propagation of extremely high energy cosmic rays,''
937: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 327}, 109 (2000).
938: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9811011;%%
939:
940: \bibitem{nawa}
941: M.~Nagano and A.~A.~Watson,
942: %``Observations And Implications Of The Ultrahigh-Energy Cosmic Rays,''
943: Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ {\bf 72}, 689 (2000).
944: %%CITATION = RMPHA,72,689;%%
945:
946: \bibitem{aprs}
947: L.~Anchordoqui, T.~Paul, S.~Reucroft and J.~Swain,
948: %``Ultrahigh energy cosmic rays: The state of the art before the Auger observatory,''
949: hep-ph/0206072.
950: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0206072;%%
951:
952: \bibitem{kuru}
953: V.~A.~Kuzmin and V.~A.~Rubakov,
954: %``Ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays: A window on postinflationary reheating epoch of the universe?,''
955: Phys.\ Atom.\ Nucl.\ {\bf 61}, 1028 (1998)
956: [Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 61}, 1122 (1998)].
957: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9709187;%%
958:
959: \bibitem{bkv}
960: V.~Berezinsky, M.~Kachelriess and A.~Vilenkin,
961: %``Ultra-high energy cosmic rays without GZK cutoff,''
962: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 79}, 4302 (1997).
963: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9708217;%%
964:
965: \bibitem{hill}
966: C.~T.~Hill,
967: %``Monopolonium,''
968: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 224}, 469 (1983).
969: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B224,469;%%
970:
971: \bibitem{gzk}
972: K.~Greisen,
973: %``End To The Cosmic Ray Spectrum?,''
974: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 16}, 748 (1966);
975: %%CITATION = PRLTA,16,748;%%
976: G.~T.~Zatsepin and V.~A.~Kuzmin,
977: %``Upper Limit Of The Spectrum Of Cosmic Rays,''
978: JETP Lett.\ {\bf 4}, 78 (1966)
979: [Pisma Zh.\ Eksp.\ Teor.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 4}, 114 (1966)].
980: %%CITATION = JTPLA,4,78;%%
981:
982: \bibitem{prjo}
983: R.~J.~Protheroe and P.~A.~Johnson,
984: %``Propagation of ultrahigh-energy protons over cosmological distances and implications for topological defect models,''
985: Astropart.\ Phys.\ {\bf 4}, 253 (1996).
986: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9506119;%%
987:
988: \bibitem{weiler}
989: T.~J.~Weiler,
990: %``Resonant Absorption Of Cosmic Ray Neutrinos By The Relic Neutrino
991: %Background,''
992: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 49}, 234 (1982).
993: %%CITATION = PRLTA,49,234;%%
994:
995:
996: \bibitem{roulet}
997: E.~Roulet,
998: %``Ultrahigh-energy neutrino absorption by neutrino dark matter,''
999: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 47}, 5247 (1993).
1000: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D47,5247;%%
1001:
1002: \bibitem{fargionweiler}
1003: D.~Fargion, B.~Mele and A.~Salis,
1004: %``Ultrahigh energy neutrino scattering onto relic
1005: % light neutrinos in galactic halo as a possible source
1006: % of highest energy extragalactic cosmic rays,''
1007: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 517}, 725 (1999);
1008: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9710029;%%
1009: T.~J.~Weiler,
1010: %``Cosmic ray neutrino annihilation on relic neutrinos
1011: % revisited: A mechanism for generating air showers
1012: % above the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin cut-off,''
1013: Astropart.\ Phys.\ {\bf 11}, 303 (1999).
1014: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9710431;%%
1015:
1016: \bibitem{ysl}
1017: S.~Yoshida, G.~Sigl and S.~j.~Lee,
1018: %``Extremely high energy neutrinos, neutrino hot dark matter, and the highest energy cosmic rays,''
1019: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 81}, 5505 (1998).
1020: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9808324;%%
1021:
1022: \bibitem{fkr}
1023: Z.~Fodor, S.~D.~Katz and A.~Ringwald,
1024: %``Determination of absolute neutrino masses from Z-bursts,''
1025: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 88}, 171101 (2002);
1026: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0105064;%%
1027: JHEP {\bf 0206}, 046 (2002).
1028: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0203198;%%
1029:
1030:
1031: \bibitem{axion}
1032: R.~D.~Peccei and H.~R.~Quinn,
1033: %``CP Conservation In The Presence Of Instantons,''
1034: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 38}, 1440 (1977);
1035: %%CITATION = PRLTA,38,1440;%%
1036: F.~Wilczek,
1037: %``Problem Of Strong P And T Invariance In The Presence Of Instantons,''
1038: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 40}, 279 (1978);
1039: %%CITATION = PRLTA,40,279;%%
1040: S.~Weinberg,
1041: %``A New Light Boson?,''
1042: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 40}, 223 (1978).
1043: %%CITATION = PRLTA,40,223;%%
1044:
1045: \bibitem{ckt}
1046: C.~Cs\'aki, N.~Kaloper and J.~Terning,
1047: %``Dimming supernovae without cosmic acceleration,''
1048: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 88}, 161302 (2002).
1049: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0111311;%%
1050:
1051: \bibitem{osc}
1052: P.~Sikivie,
1053: %``Experimental Tests Of The *Invisible* Axion,''
1054: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 51}, 1415 (1983)
1055: [Erratum-ibid.\ {\bf 52}, 695 (1984)].
1056: %%CITATION = PRLTA,51,1415;%%
1057: For an overview, see
1058: %\bibitem{Raffelt:1987im}
1059: G.~Raffelt and L.~Stodolsky,
1060: %``Mixing Of The Photon With Low Mass Particles,''
1061: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 37}, 1237 (1988).
1062: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D37,1237;%%
1063:
1064: \bibitem{grs}
1065: D.~S.~Gorbunov, G.~G.~Raffelt and D.~V.~Semikoz,
1066: %``Axion-like particles as ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays?,''
1067: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64}, 096005 (2001).
1068: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0103175;%%
1069:
1070: \bibitem{otherckt}
1071: J.~Erlich and C.~Grojean,
1072: %``Supernovae as a probe of particle physics and cosmology,''
1073: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 123510 (2002);
1074: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0111335;%%
1075: C.~Deffayet, D.~Harari, J.~P.~Uzan and M.~Zaldarriaga,
1076: %``Dimming of supernovae by photon - pseudoscalar conversion and the intergalactic plasma,''
1077: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 043517 (2002);
1078: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0112118;%%
1079: C.~Cs\'aki, N.~Kaloper and J.~Terning,
1080: %``Effects of the intergalactic plasma on supernova dimming via photon axion oscillations,''
1081: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 535}, 33 (2002);
1082: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0112212;%%
1083: E.~Mortsell, L.~Bergstrom and A.~Goobar,
1084: %``Photon axion oscillations and type Ia supernovae,''
1085: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 047702 (2002);
1086: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0202153;%%
1087: Y.~Grossman, S.~Roy and J.~Zupan,
1088: %``Effects of initial axion production and photon axion oscillation on type Ia supernova dimming,''
1089: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 543}, 23 (2002).
1090: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0204216;%%
1091:
1092: \bibitem{bound}
1093: K.~Hagiwara {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group Collaboration],
1094: %``Review Of Particle Physics,''
1095: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 010001-336 (2002);
1096: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D66,010001;%%
1097: G.~G.~Raffelt, Ann.\ Rev.\ Nucl.\ Part.\ Sci.\ {\bf 49}, 163 (1999);
1098: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9903472;%%
1099: J.~W.~Brockway, E.~D.~Carlson and G.~G.~Raffelt,
1100: %``SN 1987A gamma-ray limits on the conversion of pseudoscalars,''
1101: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 383}, 439 (1996);
1102: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9605197;%%
1103: E.~Masso and R.~Toldra,
1104: %``On a light spinless particle coupled to photons,''
1105: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 52}, 1755 (1995);
1106: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9503293;%%
1107: J.~A.~Grifols, E.~Masso and R.~Toldra,
1108: %``Gamma rays from SN1987A due to pseudoscalar conversion,''
1109: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 77}, 2372 (1996);
1110: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9606028;%%
1111: S.~Moriyama et al.,
1112: %M.~Minowa, T.~Namba, Y.~Inoue, Y.~Takasu and A.~Yamamoto,
1113: %``Direct search for solar axions by using strong magnetic field and X-ray detectors,''
1114: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 434}, 147 (1998);
1115: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9805026;%%
1116: {\tt astro-ph/0012338}.
1117:
1118:
1119: \bibitem{magn}
1120: P.~P.~Kronberg,
1121: %``Extragalactic magnetic fields,''
1122: Rept.\ Prog.\ Phys.\ {\bf 57}, 325 (1994);
1123: %%CITATION = RPPHA,57,325;%%
1124: S.~Furlanetto and A.~Loeb,
1125: %``An Intergalactic Magnetic Field from Quasar Outflows,''
1126: astro-ph/0110090.
1127: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0102076;%%
1128:
1129: \bibitem{ades}
1130: L.~A.~Anchordoqui, M.~T.~Dova, L.~N.~Epele and J.~D.~Swain,
1131: %``Effect of the 3-K background radiation on ultrahigh energy cosmic rays,''
1132: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 7356 (1997).
1133: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9704387;%%
1134:
1135: \bibitem{eye}
1136: D.~J.~Bird {\it et al.} [HIRES Collaboration],
1137: %``Evidence For Correlated Changes In The Spectrum And Composition Of Cosmic Rays At Extremely High-Energies,''
1138: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 71}, 3401 (1993).
1139: %%CITATION = PRLTA,71,3401;%%
1140:
1141: \bibitem{ave}
1142: M.~Ave, J.~A.~Hinton, R.~A.~Vazquez, A.~A.~Watson and E.~Zas,
1143: %``New constraints from Haverah Park data on the photon and iron fluxes of UHE cosmic rays,''
1144: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 85}, 2244 (2000);
1145: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0007386;%%
1146: M.~Ave, J.~A.~Hinton, R.~A.~Vazquez, A.~A.~Watson and E.~Zas,
1147: %``Constraints on the ultra high energy photon flux using inclined showers from the Haverah Park array,''
1148: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 063007 (2002).
1149: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0110613;%%
1150:
1151: \bibitem{kkst}
1152: O.~E.~Kalashev, V.~A.~Kuzmin, D.~V.~Semikoz and I.~I.~Tkachev,
1153: %``Photons as ultra high energy cosmic rays?,''
1154: astro-ph/0107130.
1155: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0107130;%%
1156:
1157: \bibitem{haverah}
1158: M.~A.~Lawrence, R.~J.~Reid and A.~A.~Watson,
1159: %``The Cosmic Ray Energy Spectrum Above 4x10**17-Ev As Measured By The Haverah Park Array,''
1160: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 17}, 733 (1991).
1161: %%CITATION = JPHGB,G17,733;%%
1162:
1163: \bibitem{sww}
1164: J.~Szabelski, T.~Wibig and A.~W.~Wolfendale,
1165: %``Cosmic Rays Of The Highest Energies: The Case For Extragalactic Heavy Nuclei,''
1166: Astropart.\ Phys.\ {\bf 17}, 125 (2002).
1167: %%CITATION = APHYE,17,125;%%
1168:
1169: \bibitem{auger}
1170: D.~Zavrtanik [AUGER Collaboration],
1171: %``The Pierre Auger Observatory,''
1172: Nucl.\ Phys.\ Proc.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 85}, 324 (2000).
1173: %%CITATION = NUPHZ,85,324;%%
1174:
1175: \bibitem{EGRET}
1176: P.~Sreekumar {\it et al.},
1177: %``EGRET observations of the extragalactic gamma ray emission,''
1178: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 494}, 523 (1998).
1179: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9709257;%%
1180:
1181:
1182: \end{thebibliography}
1183:
1184: \end{document}
1185: