NLB predictions of the positron fraction compared with the observations Antiproton production kinematics Spectral Intensities of Antiprotons and the lifetime of Cosmic Rays in the Galaxy. R. Cowsik ♯ and T. Madziwa-Nussinov § Physics Department and McDonnell Center for the Space Sciences Washington University, St. Louis, MO ABSTRACT The spectral intensities of cosmic-ray protons, antiprotons and positrons in the energy band 10 GeV < E < 300 GeV are observed to fit the same power-law ~ E -2.7, contrasting with the implications of the falling B/C ratio in the same energy band. Kinematic differences in the production of these secondary cosmic-ray particles are exploited by the Nested Leaky Box (NLB) model to consistently understand the spectra of antiprotons and positrons as purely cosmic-ray secondaries, without any additional inputs, but consistent with the B/C ratio. In this NLB model, most of the B in this energy band is created in the ‘cocoons’ near the cosmic-ray sources, from which leakage is energy dependent, while most of the antiprotons and positrons are created in the interstellar medium (ISM) from protons of much higher energy that have easily escaped the cocoons. In order to match their intensities, in the ISM with an assumed density n H ~ 0.5 cm -3, we estimate the cosmic-ray leakage lifetime, τ G to be ~ 2.3 ± 0.7 million years, independent of energy below ~ 500 TeV, beyond which it decreases with energy. The Nested Leaky Box Model 1. A large number of cosmic-ray sources are born and fade away in the Galactic disc. These sources generate cosmic rays (mostly protons) with nearly the same spectrum as observed: q p (E) ≈ q 0 E -2.7 (1) 2. A lumpy shell of stellar debris surrounds each of these sources, and cosmic rays escape out of this cocoon-like region, more rapidly at higher energies. The leakage-lifetime, τ c is taken to be dependent energy: for T > 1 GeV, τ c (E) ≈ τ 0 T ( ζ lnT) (2) T is the kinetic energy per nucleon of the nuclei or per positron or antiproton, and ζ ≈ 0.1. Note that this energy dependence is nearly a power law that steepens with increasing energy. During this transport, the cosmic rays suffer collisions with the material of the stellar debris, generating secondary particles and radiation. 3. The transport of cosmic rays subsequent to their injection into the general interstellar medium is assumed to be independent of energy at least up to 100 TeV, beyond which it is expected to decrease with energy. Below this energy, the leakage lifetime from the Galaxy is taken to be independent. τ G = constant (3) Kinematics of different production process of secondaries Theoretical estimates of the p-bar spectrum in the NLB model NLB prediction of p-bar/p ratio compared with the observations Discussion II 1.The NLB model is shown to fit the spectra of antiprotons, positrons, the B/C ratio and the bounds on anisotropy. 2. AMS data at on B/C ratio E > 300 GeV/n fall below the 2.3 Myr line, but lie within the estimated uncertainties of τ G ~ 2.3 ± 0.7 Myr, as displayed above in panel The theoretical studies of acceleration and escape of cosmic rays and their interactions with the surrounding dense environment by Telezhinsnky et al. provide support to the NLB model [28]. Discussion I If we set aside NLB model and adopt the view that τ G decreases with increasing energy according to the models much in use [16], then we should find answers to the following questions: a) How are we to generate the smooth spectra of antiprotons and positrons which match very closely those from the interactions of the cosmic ray protons, without any perceivable effects of energy dependent leakages? b) If other astrophysical processes contribute to fill up the falling spectra, how is it after energy dependent leakage and other modifications, they add up to yield such smooth spectra, very much similar to progenitors - primary cosmic rays? c) How are we to understand the high level isotropy of cosmic rays? d) The real advantage of τ G ~ E -δ assumption was to fit the E -2 spectrum expected in a high Mach number shock with the observed E -2.7 spectra by choosing δ ~ 0.7. Now with the B/C ratio showing δ ~ 0.3 fall-off requiring an E -2.4 source spectrum, what motivations are there to choose τ G as declining with energy ? Acknowledgements It is a pleasure to thank M. H. Israel, W. R. Binns, P. Blasi and M. A. Lee for extensive discussions related to this work. ♯ § References [1] O. Adriani et al., PRL 102, (2009); PRL 105, (2010); J. Wu (PAMELA Coll.): Astrophys. Space Sci. Trans., 7, , (2011). [2] A. Yamamoto et al., (BESS Coll.): The BESS program, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.), 166, 6267, (2007). [3] J. Casaus, AMS-02 experiment on the ISS, JPCS, 171 (1), p , (2009). [4] M. Aguilar et al., AMS Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, , (2013). [5] AMS Collaboration announcement, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland, 15 April 2015: AMS Days at CERN and Latest Results from the AMS Instrument on the International Space Station. [6] R. Cowsik and L. W. Wilson, Proc. 14th ICRC, Vol2, p. 659, (1975). [7] R. Cowsik and B. Burch, Phys. Rev. D, 82, , (2010); XVI International Symposium on very high energy interaction, 2010, Batavia, IL, USA, (28 June, 2010); Proc. 31st ICRC, Lodz, Poland, (2009). [8] R. Cowsik, B. Burch and T. Madziwa-Nussinov, ApJ, 786, 124, doi: / X/786/2/124, (2014). [9] S. A. Stephens, Astrophys. & Space Sci. 76, 87 (1981); L. C. Tan and L. K. Ng, J. Phys. G. Nucl. Phys., 9, 227, (1983); T. Gaisser and R. Schaefer, Ap. J. 394, 174, (1992); M. Simon et al., Ap.J doi: /305606, (1998). [10] M. di Mauro, F. Donato, A. Goudelis, and P. D. Serpico, arXiv: ; Phys. Rev. D 90, (2014). [11] R. Kappl and M. Winkler, arXiv: v1, (2014). [12] R. Cowsik, Yash Pal and S.N. Tandon, Phys. Rev. Lett., 17, 1298 (1966). [13] R. Cowsik and M.A. Lee, 1979, Ap.J., 228, 297 (1979). J. Nishimura et al. Advances in Space Res. 19, 767, (1997). P. Blasi, Phys. Rev. Lett., 103, (2009). [14] Y. Uchiyama et al. Ap.J., Letters 723, L122 (2010); P. Blasi et al., Ap.J 755, 121 (2012).; S.H. Lee et al. arXiv: [ v1] [astroph.HE] 21, April, [15] M. Cardillo et al., Astron. Astrophysics 565, A74 (2014). [16] I. Moskalenko and A. Strong, Ap.J 509, , [astro-ph/ ], (1998); R. Trotta et al.,; arXiv:0037v3 [astr.ph.HE] 2011; A. W. Strong, I. V. Moskalenko, and V. S. Ptuskin, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.57, 285 (2007). [17] J. J. Engelmann et al., Astron. Astrophys. 233, 96 (1990). [18] R. Dwyer, Astrophys. J. 322, 981 (1987). [19] J. H. Chapell and W. R. Webber, Proc. ICRC17 Paris, 2, 59, (1981). [20] A. Obermeier et al., ApJ , doi: / X/742/1/14, (2011). [21] D. MÃijller et al., Astrophys. J. 374, 356 (1991). [22] H. S. Ahn et al., Astropart. Phys. 30, 133 (2008). [23] A. D. Panov et al., Proceeding of 30th ICRC, 3, (2008). [24] J. Buckley et al., ApJ., 429, 736 (1994). [25] T. Antoni et al., Astrophys. J. 604, 687 (2004). [26] R. U. Abbasi et al., arXiv: v1. [27] M. Amenomori et al., Proc. ICRC28, p. 143, (2003). [28] I. Telezhinsky, V. V. Dwarkadas and M. Pohl, A & A, 552, A 102 (2013); icbd 541, A 153 (2012). i.Spallation reaction The energy per nucleon Similarly for other parents like C, Si etc. ii. Production of positrons iii. Production of antiprotons Production threshold is high - The spectra of positrons and antiprotons are compared with that of their progenitors, the primary cosmic ray protons. At energies above ~ 10 GeV, they have nearly identical spectral characteristics except that the effect of energy losses suffered by the positrons, will steepen the spectrum beyond 300 GeV. The observed B/C ratio is plotted along with the spectra expected from the leaky box model (NLB) with an exclusive fit to AMS data. The B/C data presented here was taken from the previous [17-24] and AMS [4-5] experiments. Measurements of the cosmic-ray anisotropy from various compilations [16, 25-27]. Also plotted are predictions from models in M-S [16] and the results of Cowsik and Burch [7], which are labeled as CB. The gray region shows the predicted anisotropy from Eq. (8) of ref [7]. (a) With τ c (t) decreasing with increasing energy ~ 75 % of B nuclei at 1 GeV/n are generated through spallation in the shell surrounding the sources and by 20 GeV/n production decreases to equal amounts in the shell and in the ISM, and theoretically decreases rapidly to very little B production in the shell. (b) Very little e + production occurs in the shell at E(e + ) > few GeV. (c) Some antiproton production below ~ 10 GeV occurs in in the shell (see figure in the next panel). The kinematics of the production of antiprotons in high-energy collision of cosmic-ray protons is shown. Beyond the threshold at E p ~ 7m p, the antiproton is produced in the grayed region between the maximum kinetic energy of T x and a minimum kinetic energy of T n, for any given energy of the primary proton. The spectrum of antiprotons observed with the PAMELA and BESS instruments are shown as filled dot [1] and diamonds [2]. We have interpreted the antiproton spectrum as the sum of two components: (1) that generated in the ISM (red dashed line) where the residence time of cosmic rays is independent of their energy and (2) a small component at energies below 10GeV, with a steep energy dependence at higher energies, generated in a shell of stellar debris (blue chain dotted line) surrounding the sources of primary cosmic rays. The solid line represents the ratio of the theoretically estimated antiproton flux to the empirical fit to the observed proton flux. The observations from PAMELA, BESS and the AMS-02 instruments [1-5] are shown. The flatness of the p-bar/p ratio implies that the leakage lifetime is independent of energy for the Galactic cosmic rays. NLB prediction of the positron fraction is compared with AMS data; the shaded steeply falling region is due to calculations by Moskalenko and Strong [16] using an alternative model with energy dependent leakage of cosmic rays from the Galaxy. PoS (ICRC2015)-548 B/C ratio in cosmic rays Cosmic-ray anisotropyObserved spectra of p, p-bar and e + in cosmic rays NLB