text:
# Nonperturbative renormalization group approach to the Ising model: a derivative expansion at order ∂⁴

## Abstract

On the example of the three-dimensional Ising model, we show that nonperturbative renormalization group equations allow one to obtain very accurate critical exponents. Implementing the order $`^4`$ of the derivative expansion leads to $`\nu =0.632`$ and to an anomalous dimension $`\eta =0.033`$ which is significantly improved compared with lower orders calculations.

Many problems in high-energy as well as in statistical physics call for nonperturbative methods. On the one hand, several physical systems are described by field theories in their strong coupling regime so that the usual perturbative techniques become troublesome. They fail either because only the first orders of perturbation are computed and do not suffice, or because, even when high orders are known, standard resummation techniques do not provide converged results. On the other hand, some phenomena such as confinement in QCD or phase transitions induced by topological defects are genuinely nonperturbative.

Apart from some methods restricted to specific dimensions or situations, very few nonperturbative techniques are available. During the last years, the Wilson approach wilson74  to the renormalization group (RG) has been turned into an efficient tool wetterich93c ; ellwanger94c ; morris94a . This nonperturbative RG can be implemented in very general situations and, in particular, in any dimension, so that it has allowed one to study several issues difficult to tackle within a perturbative framework among which the three-dimensional Gross-Neveu model hofling02 , frustrated magnets tissier , the randomly dilute Ising model tissier01b , and the Abelian Higgs model bergerhoff96 .

This method relies on a nonperturbative renormalization of the effective action $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, i.e. the Gibbs free energy. It consists in building an effective action $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ at the running scale $`k`$ by integrating out only fluctuations greater than $`k`$. At the scale $`k=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ denoting the spacing of the underlying lattice, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ coincides with the Hamiltonian $`H`$ since no fluctuation has yet been taken into account while, at $`k=0`$, it coincides with the standard effective action $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ since all fluctuations have been integrated out. Thus, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ continuously interpolates between the microscopic Hamiltonian $`H`$ and the free energy $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The running effective action $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ follows an exact equation which controls its evolution with the running scale $`k`$ wetterich93c :

$$_t\mathrm{\Gamma }_k[\varphi ]=\frac{1}{2}\frac{d^dq}{(2\pi )^d}_tR_k(q)\left\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^{(2)}[\varphi (q)]+R_k(q)\right\}^1\text{,}$$
(1)
where $`t=\mathrm{ln}(k/\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^{(2)}[\varphi ]`$ is the second functional derivative of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ with respect to the field $`\varphi (q)`$. In Eq. (1), $`R_k(q)`$ is an infrared cutoff function which suppresses the propagation of the low-energy modes without affecting the high-energy ones.

Although exact, Eq. (1) is a functional partial integro-differential equation which cannot be solved exactly. To handle it, one has to truncate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$. A natural and widely used truncation is the derivative expansion, which consists in expanding $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ in powers of $`\varphi `$, keeping only the lowest order terms. Physically, this truncation rests on the assumption that the long-distance physics of a given model is well described by the lowest derivative terms, the higher ones corresponding to less relevant operators. Up to now, only truncations up to order $`^2`$ have been considered since, in many cases, they turn out to be sufficient to get a satisfying qualitative and even sometimes quantitative description of both universal and nonuniversal behaviors berges02 .

Nevertheless, several important issues concerning the reliability of the method remain open. The first one concerns the convergence of the derivative expansion. This point is particularly delicate since, within this kind of truncation, there is no expansion parameter in terms of which the series obtained can be analyzed and controlled. It has been moreover suggested that the expansion could be only asymptotic bagnuls01 . Actually, this question of convergence has only been addressed within the perturbative context. In Refs. \[papenbrock95, ; morris99, \], it has indeed been shown that the two-loop perturbative result for the $`O(N)`$ model can be recovered from a summation of the derivative expansion. However, in its full generality, this problem still appears as a major challenge. The second issue, the truly interesting one from a practical point of view, concerns the accuracy of the results provided by low orders truncations. This has been thoroughly studied only at order $`^0`$ within the $`O(N)`$ model and at order $`^2`$ within the Ising model through the optimization of the cutoff function $`R_k`$ litim02 ; canet03a  (see also related studies with the Polchinski equation ball95 ; comellas98  and within the proper time RG formalism zappala ). Let us emphasize that, even for these models, the anomalous dimension $`\eta `$ remains poorly determined. This likely originates in the crudeness of the order $`^2`$ truncation that fails to capture the essential momentum dependence of the two-point correlation function. In this respect, an important remark is that in the critical theory, and at $`k=0`$, this function is nonanalytic —$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{k=0}^{(2)}(q)q^{2\eta }`$—, so it appears nontrivial to retrieve $`\eta `$ from a derivative expansion. However, for $`k0`$, the infrared fluctuations ($`qk`$) are suppressed and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^{(2)}(q)`$ should become regular with the standard $`q^2`$ behavior. This means that the nonanalyticity builds up smoothly as $`k`$ vanishes. Berges et al. berges02  have proposed that this function behaves approximately as $`q^2(q^2+ck^2)^{\eta /2}`$, where $`c`$ is a constant. Roughly speaking, for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^{(2)}`$, the derivative expansion consists in expanding this function around $`q=0`$ and in computing $`\eta `$ from its behavior in $`k^2`$, instead of $`q^2`$. It is not trivial that the resulting series for $`\eta `$ converge since it amounts to correct the normal $`q^2`$ behavior with higher powers of $`q^2`$. The aim of this paper is to investigate this question by including order $`^4`$ terms in the derivative expansion of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ for the three-dimensional Ising model.

The effective average action $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ of the Ising model truncated at order $`^4`$ is written as:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k[\varphi ]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^dx\{U_k\left(\rho \right)+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[Z_k(\rho )(\varphi )^2+W_k^a(\rho )\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi \right)^2+`$
$`W_k^b(\rho )(\varphi )^2\left(\varphi \mathrm{\Delta }\varphi \right)+W_k^c(\rho )\left((\varphi )^2\right)^2]\},`$
where $`\rho =\varphi ^2/2`$ is the $`\mathrm{𝖹𝖹}_2`$ invariant. Compared with its expansion at order $`^2`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ involves three new terms denoted $`W_k^s(\rho )`$ $`s=a,b,c`$, linearly independent with respect to the integration by parts. The evolution equation for the potential $`U_k`$ is derived by evaluating Eq. (1) for a uniform field configuration. By contrast, the definition and, thus, the evolution of the functions $`Z_k`$ and $`W_k^s`$’s are linked to a specific momentum dependence of the functional derivatives of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$, in the limit of vanishing external momenta:

$`Z_k(\rho )`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{p_i0}{lim}_{p_1^2}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_k}{\delta \varphi (p_1)\delta \varphi (p_2)}},`$ (3)
$`W_k^a(\rho )`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{p_i0}{lim}_{p_1^4}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_k}{\delta \varphi (p_1)\delta \varphi (p_2)}},`$ (4)
$`W_k^b(\rho )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{2\rho }}}\underset{p_i0}{lim}_{p_1^2p_2^2}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^3\mathrm{\Gamma }_k}{\delta \varphi (p_1)\delta \varphi (p_2)\delta \varphi (p_3)}},`$ (5)
$`W_k^c(\rho )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\underset{p_i0}{lim}_{p_1^2\stackrel{}{p}_2.\stackrel{}{p}_3}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^4\mathrm{\Gamma }_k}{\delta \varphi (p_1)\delta \varphi (p_2)\delta \varphi (p_3)\delta \varphi (p_4)}}\text{.}`$
As usual, to find a fixed point, we use the associated dimensionless renormalized quantities $`\overline{\rho },u_k`$, $`z_k`$ and $`w_k^s`$. The flow equations of these functions, derived from Eq. (1), are far too long to be displayed.

As in Ref. \[canet03a, \], we have implemented a further approximation which consists in expanding each running function $`u_k`$, $`z_k`$ and the $`w_k^s`$’s in powers of $`\overline{\rho }`$. The motivation which underlies this is twofold. First, in systems having a symmetry group smaller than $`O(N)`$, the number of functions analogous to $`u_k`$, $`z_k`$ and $`w_k^s`$ grows as well as the number of arguments, analogous to $`\overline{\rho }`$, on which they depend. In this case, dealing with the full field dependence at each order of the derivative expansion can be very demanding and the field expansion becomes almost unavoidable. Second, this expansion provides valuable indications about the orders in field necessary to correctly describe the critical behavior. Here, we expand the $`u_k`$, $`z_k`$ and $`w_k^s`$ functions around the configuration $`\overline{\rho }=\overline{\rho }_0`$ that minimizes $`u_k`$ since it leads to a better convergence than the expansion around $`\overline{\rho }=0`$ aoki98 :

$`\zeta _k`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{p_\zeta }{}}}\zeta _{j,k}(\overline{\rho }\overline{\rho }_0)^j\text{,}`$ (7)
where $`\zeta `$ stands for $`u,z,w^a,w^b,w^c`$. The RG equation (1) then leads to a set of ordinary coupled differential equations for the coupling constants $`\left\{\zeta _{j,k}\right\}`$. The nonperturbative features of their flows with the running scale $`k`$ are entirely encoded in a finite set of integrals, called threshold functions. There are six – three of them being specifically linked to the inclusion of the $`^4`$ order terms – which are written:

$$F_n^d=𝑑yy^{\frac{d}{2}1}\stackrel{~}{}_t\left(f(y)\frac{1}{(p(y)+m^2)^n}\right)\text{,}$$
(8)
where $`\stackrel{~}{}_t`$ means that the derivative only acts on the cutoff function $`R_k(q)=Z_{0,k}q^2r(y)`$ with $`y=q^2/k^2`$; $`p(y)=y(1+w_{0,k}^ay+r(y))`$, $`m^2=2u_{2,k}\overline{\rho }_0`$, and $`f(y)`$ can be either $`y(_yp)^i`$ with $`i=0,\mathrm{},4`$ or $`y_y^2p`$. The occurence of $`_y^2p`$ imposes the cutoff function $`R_k`$ to be at least of class $`C^3`$, which dismisses for instance the theta cutoff introduced in litim01 . Here, we choose the exponential cutoff defined by wetterich93c :

$$R_k(q)=\alpha \frac{Z_{0,k}q^2}{e^{q^2/k^2}1}\text{,}$$
(9)
which fulfills this condition and constitutes an efficient regulator. We remind that any truncation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ introduces a spurious dependence of the results on $`R_k`$. Here, we study this influence by varying the cut-off through the amplitude parameter $`\alpha `$. For each truncation, the optimal $`\alpha `$ is determined through a principle of minimum sensitivity (PMS) which indeed corresponds to an optimization of the accuracy of the critical exponents canet03a .

At each order of the derivative expansion, up to order $`^4`$, and for higher and higher order field truncations, we compute the fixed point and the associated critical exponents $`\nu `$ and $`\eta `$, as functions of $`\alpha `$. Then, for each truncation, we determine the optimized exponents from the PMS, which are referred to, in the following, as PMS exponents. We first expand in fields the potential $`u_k`$, and then $`z_k`$, which respectively constitute the orders $`^0`$ and $`^2`$ of the derivative expansion. The corresponding PMS exponents are displayed as functions of $`p_{u,z}`$ — which denote the orders of the truncation in $`\overline{\rho }`$ of $`u_k`$ and $`z_k`$ — in the first two zones of Fig. 1. At this stage, it is worth emphasizing that strong oscillations occur at the first orders in the field expansion for both orders $`^0`$ and $`^2`$. It follows that the PMS exponents become almost steady only from $`p_{u,z}=4`$. As discussed in Ref. \[canet03a, \], the truncation $`p_u=8`$ and $`p_z=6`$ allows one to obtain a very accurate approximation of the order $`^2`$ results. Indeed, the corresponding exponents $`\nu _{\text{PMS}}=0.6291`$ and $`\eta _{\text{PMS}}=0.0440`$ differ by less than $`1\%`$ compared with their “asymptotic” values obtained for large $`p_{u,z}`$ (see Table 1). Note also that, already at this order $`^2`$, $`\nu _{\text{PMS}}`$ agrees well with the best known values whereas, as mentioned above, this is not the case for $`\eta _{\text{PMS}}`$.

Let us come to the role of the order $`^4`$ terms. We choose to simultaneously expand in fields the three functions $`w_k^s`$, $`s=a,b,c`$, up to $`p_{w^s}=5`$, while fixing $`p_u=8`$ and $`p_z=6`$. Actually, the highest truncation corresponds to $`p_{w^c}=5`$ and $`p_{w^{a,b}}=4`$ for the following reason. Figure 2 displays, for each $`w_k^s`$ considered independently, the evolutions of the PMS exponents with the order of the field truncation.

It shows that the exponents associated with $`w_k^a`$ or $`w_k^b`$ have almost converged, up to a few tenths of percent, as soon as $`p_{w^{a,b}}=3`$. On the contrary, $`\eta _{\text{PMS}}`$ and $`\nu _{\text{PMS}}`$ related to $`w_k^c`$ still oscillate at this order. We have checked that, within the simultaneous expansion of the three $`w_k^s`$, $`w_k^c`$ indeed dictates the variations of the critical exponents, $`w_{j,k}^a`$ and $`w_{j,k}^b`$ exerting a minor influence for $`j3`$.

This, together with the fact that we encounter here the limits of our computational capacities, justifies our choice $`(p_{w^a},p_{w^b},p_{w^c})=(4,4,5)`$ for the last truncation.

We can now concentrate on the behavior of the exponents at the order $`^4`$. At the low orders field truncations, corresponding to $`p_{w^s}=0,1,`$ and $`2`$, each exponent exhibits a single PMS solution, $`\nu _{\text{PMS}}`$ and $`\eta _{\text{PMS}}`$, which are thus unambiguously defined. As displayed in Fig. 3, several PMS solutions appear for the next two truncations, corresponding to $`p_{w^s}=3,4`$. This renders the optimization procedure in these cases (see discussion below) unclear.

Concerning the largest truncation, $`\eta _{\text{PMS}}`$ is unambiguously determined from the unique PMS solution. For $`\nu `$, several PMS solutions exist. However, provided the field expansion has almost converged at this order, a unique PMS solution can also be selected for $`\nu `$. The argument underlying this choice originates from the fact that when no truncation in derivatives is performed, the results are independent of the cutoff. Therefore, the best cutoff is the one achieving the weakest sensitivity of the results with respect to the order of the derivative expansion, i.e. leading to the fastest convergence (see Ref. \[canet03a, \] for a detailed discussion). In practice, this consists in minimizing the difference between the values of $`\nu `$ determined at order $`^n`$ and at order $`^{n+1}`$. In our case, this selects the PMS solution located at $`\alpha 0.6`$ (see Fig. 3).

Let us now discuss the convergence of the field expansion. To this end, we first examine the two truncations $`p_{w^s}=3,4`$ for which multiple PMS solutions exist for both exponents. There is no argument to clearly settle between the PMS solutions. We present two sensible way to favor reasonable PMS solutions. First, one can choose to minimize, for these orders, the oscillations induced by the field expansion. This, in turn, corresponds to improving the rapidity of convergence of the field expansion. This choice corresponds to the full line in the third zone of Fig. 1. Alternatively, one can decide to follow a given PMS solution (characterized by its concavity and its location $`\alpha `$), order by order in the field expansion, starting from the low orders $`p_{w^s}=0,1,2`$, where the PMS solutions are unique. This corresponds to the dashed line in Fig. 1. Note that both criteria lead to the same PMS solution for $`p_{w^s}=4`$. Finally, the important features of the exponents evolution remain essentially unchanged whatever choice is adopted: low orders generate strong oscillations that tend to vanish after a few orders. Indeed, the results for $`p_{w^s}=4`$: $`\nu _{\text{PMS}}=0.6234`$ and $`\eta _{\text{PMS}}=0.0289`$, are very close to those for $`p_{w^s}=5`$: $`\nu _{\text{PMS}}=0.6321`$ and $`\eta _{\text{PMS}}=0.0330`$. Although the exponents are not rigorously steady, this suggests that the asymptotic regime is just entered. This is consistent with the fact that, at orders $`^0`$ and $`^2`$, the oscillations die down for the same order of truncation: $`p_{u,z}4`$. This legitimates our former assumption of field convergence. We therefore approximate the order $`^4`$ results by the $`p_{w^s}=5`$ estimates, see Table I.

To summarize, we have computed the critical exponents of the three-dimensional Ising model up to the $`^4`$ order in the derivative expansion. The successive contributions significantly decrease with the order, which supports good convergence properties of this expansion, and in particular a correct behavior of its implementation around $`q=0`$. We emphasize that the exponent $`\nu `$ is almost unaltered at order $`^4`$ compared with its value at the order $`^2`$, whereas $`\eta `$ undergoes a substantial correction which drives it within a few percents of the best known values. This confirms the statement that the inclusion of the $`^4`$ order terms allow one to improve the anomalous dimension. Note that although fully converged results would require to handle the full field dependence of $`u_k`$, $`z_k`$ and the $`w_k^s`$’s canet03c , this study shows that the truncation in fields constitutes a reliable way to compute critical exponents. Finally, the present work brings out convincing evidence of the ability of the effective average action method to provide very accurate estimates of physical quantities.


format: text

text:
# The universal 𝜓''/𝜓' ratio as unambiguous signature for hard physics in nuclear reactions and in decays of beauty hadrons

## Abstract

We suggest the ratio of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }(3770)/\psi ^{}(3686)`$ production cross sections as an unambiguous probe of the dominance of hard, point-like physics in charmonium production. If hard physics dominates the charmonium production the ratio : $`\frac{\sigma (\psi ^{\prime \prime })}{\sigma (\psi ^{})}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\psi ^{\prime \prime }l^+l^{})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\psi ^{}l^+l^{})}0.1`$ is independent of the process. We argue that since the dominant $`D\overline{D}`$ decay mode of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$-meson can be detected with a high efficiency at the current facilities the effective counting rate for the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ production should be comparable to that of the $`\psi ^{}`$ and hence it could be observed at the $`B`$-factories. Even in hadron induced processes the ratio will not be changed significantly by final state interactions due to the similar mass and size of these two charmonium states. A possible exception are the charmonium state interactions with low energy particles – comovers – which are especially relevant for the heavy ion collisions.

The production of the charmonium states in inclusive hadron-hadron collisions remains one of the challenges for the theory. Understanding of the charmonium production dynamics is important for a number of applications. This includes the dynamics of $`BJ/\psi +X`$ decays which play an important role in the investigations of the CP violation, see e.g. . The $`J/\psi `$ production is also often considered as an effective probe of the heavy ion collisions. The matter is further complicated by the question whether the mass of the $`c`$-quark is sufficiently large as compared to the scale of the strong interaction to apply perturbation theory for the production of charm quark pairs in pp, pA, and AA collisions as well as in the decay of $`B`$-mesons.

So far experimental studies of charmonium states focused on the production of $`J/\psi ,\psi ^{},`$ and $`\chi `$-states. The aim of this letter is to draw attention to the production of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ ($`\psi (3770)`$) meson as a method to probe the hardness of the process. Really in hard processes like in the process: $`e\overline{e}`$ charmonium state the contribution of S states should dominate the $`c\overline{c}`$ systems independently whether S or D states dominate in the wave function of charmonium state $`\varphi (k)`$ in an average charmonium configuration. This is because the matrix element of the process is $`\varphi (k)d^3k\varphi (r=0)`$. But in a nonrelativistic charmonium model the wave function of a state with orbital momentum L e.g. the D wave is $`r^L`$ at small relative interquark distances r because of the orbital momentum barrier. Thus the ratio of $`\psi ^{}`$ to $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ ($`\psi (3770)`$) should be the same for any process of hard production of charmonium states. The universality will be lost for the processes where the production will be influenced by nonperturbative QCD physics. So in this paper, we compare our results with the predictions of the nonrelativistic QCD (NRQCD) approach to the production of the onium states  which allowed to describe several features of the data. (Note that so far this approach meets problems in a number of cases - see ref.  for a recent review.) The NRQCD approach of ref.  assumed the dominance of D waves in the produced $`c\overline{c}`$ quark system which means nonhard production mechanisms play an important role. (The authors claims that the uncertainties in the evaluation of the relevant amplitudes may be one order of magnitude.) So we compare predictions of the NRQCD approach of ref.  and hard production mechanisms for the BELLE and the BABAR experiments.

We argue that the experimental observation of this process is feasible at the current facilities (which have a very good efficiency for detection of $`D`$mesons), and would allow to check whether the $`\psi ^{}`$ and $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ are produced by a $`c\overline{c}`$ at short distances111An important advantage of comparing $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ production as compared to the case of $`J/\psi `$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ is a near degeneracy of the masses of these states but different dominating decay channels.. Our suggestion is based on the well known observation that the properties of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ are well described (actually has been predicted) using the charmonium model by Eichten . Within this model it is found that the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ is the $`1D`$ state with a small admixture of the $`2S`$-wave and correspondingly $`\psi ^{}`$ is the $`2S`$ state with a small admixture of the $`1D`$-wave. Namely

$`|\psi ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\theta |2S+\mathrm{sin}\theta |1D,`$ (1)
$`|\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}\theta |1D\mathrm{sin}\theta |2S.`$ (2)
Since only the $`S`$-wave contributes to the decay of $`\psi `$ states into $`e^+e^{}`$-pairs (at least in nonrelativistic charmonium models) the value of $`\theta =19\pm 2^o`$ can be determined from the data on the $`e^+e^{}`$ decay widths of $`\psi ^{}`$ and $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ as222An estimate of ref.  within the charmonium model indicate that due to recoil corrections of the electromagnetic current the D-wave gives a $`20\%`$ contribution to the e.m. decay width. However, this model with the same parameters yields a too large electromagnetic decay width for the S-state.

$$\mathrm{tan}^2(\theta )=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\psi ^{\prime \prime }e^+e^{})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\psi ^{}e^+e^{})}.$$
(3)
If the charmonium production is a short distance process, then it is proportional to the square of the wave function of charmonium at zero distance. Therefore, only the $`S`$-wave can contribute and the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }/\psi ^{}`$ ratio is universal, i.e. not energy dependent and not dependent on the process. Since the masses of $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ are practically the same, the difference of the wave functions in the origin is the only source of the difference of the production rates. Correspondingly, the mixing model allows us to predict

$$\frac{\sigma (\psi ^{\prime \prime })}{\sigma (\psi ^{})}=\mathrm{tan}^2(\theta )0.1.$$
(4)
It is instructive to consider the produced $`c\overline{c}`$ as a coherent superposition of the hadronic states. Since $`m_\psi ^{}m_{\psi ^{\prime \prime }}`$ the coherence of the $`c\overline{c}`$ configuration which ultimately transforms into either $`\psi ^{}`$ or $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ holds up to the large distances $`l_c2P/(m_{\psi ^{\prime \prime }}^2m_\psi ^{}^2)\gamma 2.3fm`$, where $`\gamma `$ is the $`\gamma `$-factor of the meson. $`l_c`$ exceeds the size of the interaction region for all conceivable kinematics except deeply in the nucleus fragmentation region. Therefore it is more appropriate to think of the propagation of the $`2S`$-state through the media with a subsequent decomposition of this state into $`\psi ^{}`$ and $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$.

The hadronic final state interactions cannot change significantly the predicted ratio. Indeed, soft QCD interactions cannot transform the $`S`$-state to $`D`$-state with significant probability. Significant values for the cross sections of the nondiagonal exclusive diffractive processes are a signature in the hadronic basis for the color screening phenomenon in the interaction of small color singlets  which should be a correction in soft QCD processes. The same conclusion is valid in the PQCD model for the charm dipole nucleon interactions. Hence the prediction of eq. (3) appears to be pretty robust provided $`\psi `$ are produced via hard process333Note that though the mass resolution in the current experiments is not good enough to resolve $`\psi ^{}`$ and $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ in the lepton mode the contribution of $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ into such decays is negligible due to much smaller value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{e^+e^{}}/\mathrm{\Gamma }_{tot}`$.. At the same time if soft dynamics determines production of $`\psi ^{\prime \prime },\psi ^{}`$ a stronger suppression of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ production compared to the $`\psi ^{}`$ production seems to be not natural since the charmonium models lead practically to the same sizes of the two mesons. For example, the model of ref.  gives for the average interquark distances $`r_{2S}=0.760`$ fm and $`r_{1D}=0.786`$ fm.

Let us consider the consequences of the prediction given by eq. (4) for the $`B`$-meson decays now. The branching fraction for B-decays into the $`\psi (2S)`$ was found by the BABAR-collaboration to be $`0.297\pm 0.020\pm 0.020\%`$ . This branching fraction is averaged over the different B-mesons. The errors are statistical and systematical, respectively. The CLEO-collaboration found a comparable value of $`0.316\pm 0.014\pm 0.023\pm 0.016\%`$ . The third error is an overall scale factor. Due to the chosen decay channels of the $`\psi (2S)`$ ($`\psi (2S)`$ dileptons and $`\psi (2S)J/\psi +\pi ^++\pi ^{})`$ we expect that these mesons are mostly $`\psi ^{}`$ states with a negligible admixture of $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ states. With the ratio of eq. (4) we predict the branching fractions for decays of the $`B`$-mesons into the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ to be approximately $`0.03\%`$. In contrast the NRQCD approach predicts $`B(B\delta _1+X)=0.28\%`$ , where $`\delta _1`$ is the D-wave charmonium with the quantum numbers of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$.

This branching fractions for decays of the $`B`$-mesons into the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ seems to be smaller than the typical errors of these experiments. However, the statistics may not be problematic since in the measurement of the $`B\psi (2S)`$ both the BABAR and CLEO used the dileptonic decay channels of the $`\psi (2S)`$ or of the $`J/\psi `$ which are smaller than $`1\%`$ and $`10\%`$, respectively, while the decay of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ into $`D`$-mesons is the dominating channel. For this channel the detection efficiency is much higher. Hence it seems likely that the counting rate for production of $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ via $`D\overline{D}`$ decays could be comparable to that for the $`\psi ^{}`$ decays via dilepton channels. If so this could provide a cross check of the measurement of the CP violation using new channels involving $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ production. In the refs.  the collaborations CLEO and Belle showed that the channel $`B^{\pm ,0}\psi (2S)+K^{\pm ,0}`$ is 20% as large as the same channel for the $`J/\psi `$. However, due to the chosen decay channels this is the contribution of the $`\psi ^{}`$ only and the corresponding $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ may add another 20% if measured via the $`D\overline{D}`$ decays.

Additionally, the Belle Collaboration reported recently about the double charmonium production in $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation at $`10.6`$ GeV 444We are grateful to A. Dumitru for drawing our attention to the refs.  and for discussions.. In different theoretical works (one of the most recent is ref. ) is discussed if the cross section for double charmonium production can be described within a perturbative framework. However, the ratio of eq. (4) may be used here to test if these charmonium states result from local processes ($`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation, or PQCD) or from soft processes in the jet fragmentation. The BELLE collaboration found a production cross section for the $`\psi ^{}`$ of $`\sigma (e^+e^{}\psi ^{}+X)=0.67\pm 0.09`$ pb. The cross section of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ calculated in ref.  with the NRQCD approach is $`\sigma (e^+e^{}\delta _1+X)=0.043`$ pb. This means that they predict roughly a factor of two more $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ than we, since this D-wave channel has the same order as the contribution of the S-wave.

In $`p\overline{p}`$ collisions at the Tevatron the CDF-collaboration found an inclusive production cross section for the $`\psi ^{}`$ of $`\sigma (p\overline{p}\psi ^{}+X)=30.1\pm 6.6_{4.2}^{+3.8}\pm 6.6`$ nb . The errors are statistical, systematical, and due to the uncertainty of the $`\psi ^{}\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ branching ratio555With the latest value for the $`\psi ^{}\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ branching ratio of $`\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\psi ^{}\mu ^+\mu ^{})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\psi ^{}X)}=0.007\pm 0.0009`$  this would be $`\sigma (p\overline{p}\psi ^{}+X)=33.1\pm 6.6_{4.2}^{+3.8}\pm 4.3`$ nb.. Since the $`\psi ^{}`$ is measured here via the decay into $`\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ pairs, there is nearly no admixture of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$. Therefore we predict with eq. (4) an inclusive production cross section for the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ of $`\sigma (p\overline{p}\psi ^{\prime \prime }+X)3`$ nb.

The $`\psi ^{}`$ meson production was also studied with 800 GeV protons at the Fermilab by the E789 and E772 collaboration using a set of nuclear targets . These data together with eq. (4) yield for the integrated over $`x_F`$ and $`p_t`$ production cross section of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ on a hydrogen target

$$\sigma (pp\psi ^{\prime \prime }+X)=40\pm 19\text{ nb}.$$
(5)
Charmonium is also measured in proton nucleus collisions at a slightly higher energy ($`E_{lab}=920`$ GeV) at HERA-B .

Note that several recent analyses of charmonium production processes performed within the NRQCD approach, see e.g. , have suggested the possibility of a significant production cross section of D-wave states. We compared our results for the BABAR and the BELLE experiment with the NRQCD predictions. According to NRQCD in these processes the direct contribution to the D-wave charmonium states is as large as the contribution to the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ due to the admixture of the S-wave.

In this paper we compare the prediction of eq. (4) with the actual predictions of the NRQCD. From this angle it would be very important to look at the simplest process of the coherent photoproduction of charmonia. This is naturally a point-like process, in which the initial $`c\overline{c}`$ is produced in the S-state. Hence for this process all deviations from eq. (4) would be due to final state interactions. In particular it would be very interesting to study the A-dependence of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }/\psi ^{}`$ ratio.

Also for heavy ion physics this could be an interesting investigations. The ratio of eq. (4) will not be changed due to hadronic final state interactions since these two states are very similar in size and mass. This can be tested at CERN-SPS by the NA60 collaboration  or at RHIC by the PHENIX collaboration . Remember that for the inclusive charm production the current data both at FNAL energies  and at RHIC  are consistent with the linear dependence of the cross section on A which is expected within the QCD factorization theorem for the kinematics of the discussed experiments.

We discussed above that hadronic final state interactions will not change the ratio of eq. (4). However, in heavy ion collisions the formation of new phases is possible, e.g. the quark gluon plasma (QGP). It is not understood how to calculate this ratio in nonperturbative QCD in the QGP. However, for heavy ion collisions the thermal production of charmonium states is discussed in the literature . In these models the ratio of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ and the $`\psi ^{}`$ yield is given by

$$\frac{\sigma (\psi ^{\prime \prime })}{\sigma (\psi ^{})}=\left(\frac{m_{\psi ^{\prime \prime }}}{m_\psi ^{}}\right)^{3/2}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{m_{\psi ^{\prime \prime }}m_\psi ^{}}{T}\right).$$
(6)
$`T=170÷180`$ MeV in eq. (6) is the temperature, which is fitted to particle ratios in heavy ion collisions. Thus, eq. (6) yields in total

$$\frac{\sigma (\psi ^{\prime \prime })}{\sigma (\psi ^{})}=0.63÷0.65,$$
(7)
which is much larger than ratio of the cross sections predicted for the hard production processes. Moreover one should take into account that corrections to eq. (4) due to the higher $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ mass decrease this ratio even more. E.g. the pole mass of the propagators might yield a suppression factor of $`\left(\frac{m_\psi ^{}}{m_{\psi ^{\prime \prime }}}\right)^2=\left(\frac{3.686}{3.77}\right)^2=0.96`$. The suppression which comes due to the shift of the initial partons to higher Bjorken x due to the higher mass yields for the gluon distribution a factor $`\left(\frac{13.686/\sqrt{s}}{13.77/\sqrt{s}}\right)^{12}`$. For the relatively low SPS-energies of $`\sqrt{s}=20`$ GeV this suppression factor is 0.94. However, since these corrections are smaller than 10$`\%`$ and since they even increase the difference between soft and hard production we can safely neglect these corrections here. Please note that for some experiments the kinematics can be chosen in a way that the mass difference between the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ and the $`\psi ^{}`$ becomes unimportant, e.g. in hadron-hadron and hadron-nucleus collisions. Also, the mass difference becomes unimportant at high transverse momenta, since here the transverse mass not the rest mass of the particles is the relevant parameter.

To summarize, we have presented arguments in favour of a significant rate of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }`$ production in various hard processes and for the sensitivity of the ratio of the $`\psi ^{\prime \prime }/\psi ^{}`$ rate to the dynamics of charmonium production. A number of the current experiments can answer this question by scanning their existing data.

Acknowledgement:
We thank E. Braaten and T. Ullrich for useful discussions. This work was supported in part by GIF and DOE. L.G. thanks the Minerva Foundation for support.


text:
# G0.087-0.087, a highly polarized flat spectrum filament near the Galactic Centre ArcBased on observations with the Effelsberg 100-m telescope operated by the Max-Planck-Institut für Radioastronomie (MPIfR), Bonn, Germany

## 1 Introduction

The Galactic Centre (GC) Arc is one of the most unusual radio structures in the Galaxy. It is located at a projected distance of about 30 pc from the Sgr A complex and consists of long, thin, almost straight filaments, running nearly perpendicular to the Galactic plane, embedded in diffuse emission. The spectrum of the Arc is flat or inverted up to 43 GHz (Reich et al. rei88 (1988)) and compatible with a quasi-monoenergetic particle spectrum. This holds for its most intense section of about 40 pc in length within the Galactic disk. Its spectrum steepens drastically away from the plane, where the Arc can be followed up to about 400 pc distance (Reich rei90 (1990); Pohl et al. pohl92 (1992)). High-frequency observations beyond 10 GHz are required to directly trace the magnetic field structure of the Arc, since large rotation measures (RMs) exceeding several thousands $`\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{m}^2`$ are observed, and in addition strong depolarization is present.

Early Effelsberg 32 GHz measurements including linear polarization (Reich rei90 (1990); Lesch & Reich lesch92 (1992)) revealed percentage polarizations of about 50% close to its intrinsic value of about 60% with the magnetic field running almost parallel to the Arc. Its narrow filaments disappear at 43 GHz, while the flux density dominating diffuse component is still visible (Sofue et al. sof92 (1992)). These observations agree with a magnetic field strength in the milli–Gauss range for the filaments as proposed by Yusef-Zadeh & Morris (1987a ) to resist the pressure by interstellar clouds. However, such strong magnetic fields limit the synchrotron lifetime to a few hundred years, which is significantly below that of the diffuse Arc component where the magnetic field strength is of the order of $`10^4`$ Gauss assuming equipartition (Reich rei90 (1990)). Several particle acceleration scenarios have been proposed to explain the unusual properties of the Arc. The detection of excessive 150 GHz emission (Reich et al. rei99 (2000)) at the boundary of a massive expanding molecular cloud (Tsuboi et al. tsu97 (1997); Oka et al. Oka97 (1997)) has strengthened the idea of particle acceleration by magnetic reconnection at the surface of that cloud.

The Arc is a unique structure, although deep low-frequency observations revealed a number of similar although much fainter and shorter nonthermal filaments (NTFs) in the GC area (LaRosa et al. la00 (2000)). The NTFs have in general steep spectra. Some of them show a spectral steepening with frequency (Lang et al. la99 (1999)) or a spectral index gradient along their length (LaRosa et al. la01 (2001)). Like the Arc many NTFs are located close to molecular clouds. The NTFs may represent fading relics of structures similar to the Arc, where particle acceleration stopped or became inefficient. Strong magnetic fields then quickly steepen the spectra.

In the course of a larger 32 GHz GC survey a weak filament, G0.087$``$0.087, with properties like the Arc was identified, which is described in this paper.

## 2 Observations and data reduction

The GC region was observed at 32 GHz with the Effelsberg 100-m telescope in several clear nights between 2000 and 2002. Details of the performance of the telescope at that frequency are listed in Table 1. 3C286 served as the primary calibrator at 32 GHz (Table 1). A particular problem is the low elevation of the GC region at Effelsberg, which limits observations within elevations between $`8\mathrm{°}`$ and about $`11\mathrm{°}`$. This results in an observing time of about three hours a day. To guarantee pointing and flux density calibration at these low elevations all measurements were tied to the peak flux density of Sgr A (including Sgr A\* and Sgr A West), which is only partly resolved by the $`26\mathrm{}`$ beam. Its peak flux density for the Effelsberg beam was measured as 9.7 Jy (Morsi & Reich mor86 (1986)), which nicely fits to flux densities obtained from other high-frequency observations (Tsuboi et al. tsu88 (1988)).

Polarization data were collected with a three-feed system (MOD 1) installed in the secondary focus of the telescope. The two circular components of each feed were connected to two cooled HEMT receivers with 2 GHz bandwidth followed by an IF-polarimeter. The feeds were aligned along azimuth–direction with spacings of $`2\mathrm{}`$, 4$`\stackrel{}{.}`$3 and 6$`\stackrel{}{.}`$3, which requires mapping along the azimuth–direction. The complex extended emission in the GC region requires to make long scans of $`30\mathrm{}`$ to $`40\mathrm{}`$ to restore all components properly.

MOD 1 also receives total intensities, but the sensitivity is low. Since 1999 a second module (MOD 2) is available with a different technical concept to measure total intensities only. The circularly polarized components of different feeds were connected by waveguides into a magic-T. The signal difference between two feeds was obtained by a correlation of the magic-T outputs. The data were restored into a single beam map using the Emerson et al. (emer79 (1979)) algorithm. Adding all three spacings of MOD 2 a three times higher sensitivity for total intensities was achieved than with MOD 1 (Table 1). However, at the low elevations of the GC atmospheric emission reduces the nominal sensitivities significantly by extinction and increased system noise. MOD 2 has the same feed separations as MOD 1 and was installed with an offset of $`153\mathrm{}`$ in elevation parallel to MOD 1 with the same azimuth offsets. Pointing errors of a few arcsec and small focal differences between individual coverages reduced the angular resolution to about $`27\mathrm{}`$.

## 3 Results and discussion

In Fig. 1 the total intensity map of G0.087$``$0.087 at 32 GHz is shown including a section of the Arc. The rms–noise of the total intensities was measured to be about 10 mJy/beam. Polarization bars are superimposed. The rms–noise in polarized intensity is about 4 mJy/beam. G0.087$``$0.087 is outstanding in polarization, while its total intensity is somewhat masked by large-scale emission. To enhance the contrast large-scale total intensity structures were partly removed by applying a background filtering technique (Sofue & Reich sof79 (1979)). The length of the filamentary structure G0.087$``$0.087 is about $`2\stackrel{}{.}5`$ corresponding to a projected length of about 6.2 pc for a GC distance of 8.5 kpc. The intensity along the filament’s ridge is about 70 mJy/beam with a percentage polarization of about 50%. G0.087$``$0.87 is much shorter and about eight times weaker than the adjacent section of the Arc. Both structures run almost parallel deviating by the same inclination angle of about $`9\mathrm{°}`$ from Galactic latitude direction. G0.087$``$0.087 indicates that the magnetic field direction traced by the Arc extends for a larger area.

We have searched for counterparts of G0.087$``$0.087 in lower frequency maps. Single-dish data, which all have lower angular resolution, show no sign of G0.087$``$0.087 in total power or polarization (e.g. Seiradakis et al. sei89 (1989)). This is not unexpected in view of the dominating large-scale emission. Also polarized emission is not visible due to strong depolarization in the GC direction, which even masks the much stronger polarized emission from the Arc largely.

The polarization angle of G0.087$``$0.087 is in the range of $`63\mathrm{°}`$ to $`80\mathrm{°}`$. In case of no Faraday rotation the magnetic field direction would be inclined by about $`19\mathrm{°}`$ or $`36\mathrm{°}`$ in respect to the filament’s axis. However, in the most likely case that the magnetic field is parallel to the filament the observed angle deviations imply RMs of the order of $`3800\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{m}^2`$ to $`7200\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{m}^2`$. With the same argument the RMs along the Arc are between $`2400\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{m}^2`$ and $`3400\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{m}^2`$. Such high RMs are unusual for Galactic emission structures, but rather similar to those reported previously for the Arc structure (Tsuboi et al. tsu87 (1987); Sofue et al. sof87 (1987); Yusef-Zadeh & Morris 1987b ).

Weak filamentary total intensity emission of G0.087$``$0.087 is identified in a 1.4 GHz VLA map published by Yusef-Zadeh & Morris (1987a ), where numerous weak filamentary structures are visible. This interferometer map does not include large-scale emission. Many filaments of similar strength are noted on high-resolution VLA maps at low frequencies (e.g. LaRosa et al. la00 (2000)), but none of them has a counterpart at 32 GHz like G0.087$``$0.087 as expected for steep-spectrum emission. In Fig. 2 we show 1.4 GHz total intensities from the VLA (Yusef-Zadeh & Morris 1987a ) with 32 GHz polarized intensities superimposed for the same area as in Fig. 1 and at the same angular resolution of $`27\mathrm{}`$. The wide frequency interval and the rather similar total intensity levels in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 indicate rather flat or slightly inverted spectra. From orthogonal cuts across the filaments (shown in Fig. 3) a spectral index of $`\alpha 0.15(\mathrm{S}\nu ^\alpha )`$ is calculated for G0.087$``$0.087. Cuts across the Arc give a spectral index of $`\alpha 0.10`$ for its maximum emission. These spectral indices are rather similar to those reported by Reich et al. (rei88 (1988)) from a multifrequency study of the Arc between 863 MHz and 43 GHz at $`1\stackrel{}{.}2`$ angular resolution. The missing large-scale structures in the VLA map seem to have little influence on the spectral indices derived for distinct features like the Arc and G0.087$``$0.087. A rather conservative estimate for possible scaling errors of up to 10% for each map result in a spectral index change of about $`\delta \alpha 0.06`$. The similarity of spectral indices for the Arc and G0.087$``$0.87 suggest that they were created in a similar process. Both structures are different from the majority of nonthermal filamentary structures in the GC region with steep spectra, which are too faint to show up in the present 32 GHz map.

The apparent interaction of the massive molecular cloud G0.11$``$0.11 with the Arc at its eastern periphery was discussed by Tsuboi et al. (tsu97 (1997)). The cloud has a size of about 7.5 pc and a mass of $`(2.03.6)\times 10^5\mathrm{M}_\mathrm{o}`$. It expands and rotates with 20 km/s and 4 km/s, respectively. Reich et al. (rei99 (2000)) rediscussed this interaction in view of new 150 GHz observations with the Nobeyama 45-m telescope, which show enhanced emission across the interacting areas. This excessive high-frequency emission traces the region of particle acceleration at the surface of G0.11$``$0.11. Magnetic reconnection is the likely acceleration process. G0.087$``$0.087 is – like the Arc – seen towards the periphery of the molecular cloud, but on its western side. It is rather suggestive to assume that the same interaction process as for the Arc takes place. However, the much lower intensity of the G0.087$``$0.087 filament suggests that the acceleration process is less efficient compared to the Arc. Figure 4 displays G0.087$``$0.087 and the Arc at the western and eastern periphery of the molecular cloud G0.11$``$0.11.

G0.087$``$0.087 is barely resolved at 32 GHz. The unconvolved 1.4 GHz VLA total intensity data with an angular resolution of $`17\stackrel{}{.}1\times 16\stackrel{}{.}4`$ limit the intrinsic width of G0.087$``$0.087 to about $`20\mathrm{}`$. The polarized intensity distribution (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2) indicates weak diffuse emission slightly above the noise level extending across G0.11$``$0.11. Thus it may also be possible that the molecular cloud is surrounded by synchrotron emission forming a thin torus with a thickness of about 1 pc. In such a case G0.087$``$0.087 results from an edge-on view of the torus. Particle acceleration takes place at a larger area on the surface of the molecular cloud, where it is expanding in orthogonal direction to the ambient magnetic field direction. In this scenario the Arc is the exceptional structure, where additional conditions like magnetic field compression are needed to make the particle acceleration process more efficient than elsewhere on the surface of G0.11$``$0.11. The excessive brightness of the Arc compared to G0.087$``$0.087 also indicates a larger magnetic field strength.

It has been shown observationally (Sofue et al. sof92 (1992), Reich et al. rei99 (2000)) that the Arc is a rather short-living structure not exceeding a lifetime of a few thousand years. Reich et al. (rei99 (2000)) argue for a non-pressure equilibrium between the Arc and G0.11$``$0.11 to avoid magnetic field strenghts exceeding 1 mGauss, which seem not to be compatible with the minimum lifetime of the Arc given by its physical length. A weaker magnetic field for G0.087$``$0.087 implies a longer lifetime and a spectral turn-over will be shifted towards higher frequencies when compared to the Arc. However, its intrinsic faintness makes G0.087$``$0.087 a difficult object to observe and its physical parameters are therefore not easy to constrain.

G0.11$``$0.11 is a very unusual molecular cloud in the GC region with a high kinetic temperature (Oka et al. Oka97 (1997)). CHANDRA observations of the G0.11$``$0.11 area revealed diffuse X-ray emission distributed across the cloud with enhanced filamentary emission along the edges of the molecular cloud in the direction parallel to the Arc and G0.087$``$0.087 (Yusef-Zadeh et al. yus02 (2002), their Figs. 1 and 2). The X-ray filament near the Arc is rather strong, a weaker one is clearly visible towards G0.087$``$0.087, as indicated in Fig. 3. These observations further support the interaction scenario between the Arc, G0.087$``$0.087 and G0.11$``$0.11. Yusef-Zadeh et al. (yus02 (2002)) proposed that relativistic electrons, which likely are from the acceleration process, provide the heating of the molecular cloud. The unidentified EGRET source 3J1746$``$2851 (Hartman et al. hart99 (1999)) might also result from that interaction. This supports the previous suggestion of Pohl (pohl97 (1997)) that the GC $`\gamma `$-ray source coincides with the Arc rather than with the Sgr A complex.

## 4 Conclusions

A new filament G0.087$``$0.087 with rather similar spectral and polarization characteristics compared to the GC Arc has been identified. It runs parallel to the Arc and is located at the western periphery of the same molecular cloud (G0.11$``$0.11) believed to be in interaction with the Arc. The same particle acceleration process, although of lower efficiency, seems to take place at G0.087$``$0.087. It may be a single filament or results from a faint emission torus surrounding G0.11$``$0.11 seen edge-on. The orientation of the Arc and of G0.087$``$0.087 with the same inclination of about $`9\mathrm{°}`$ supports the idea of the existence of a large scale poloidal field throughout the GC.

###### Acknowledgements.

I like to thank Ute Teuber for her long lasting successful work on the 32 GHz Effelsberg receivers.