\section{BACKGROUND}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{1.\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}

Given possibly very chaotic first stages of any universe it seems that more disciplined
quantum structure would arise a little later rather than earlier (cf. \cite{c009,cath,gros,naga,nels,smol}).  In this spirit we recall the
geometric Weyl-Dirac structure associated with quantum mechanics via Audretsch,
Castro, Santamato, et al (cf. \cite{audr,agsn,aula,cstr,satm}) which we discussed and
embellished in \cite{c006,c007,c009,caro,cl,crar,clrr}, following also Quiros, F. and A. Shojai, et al (\cite{bqcd,quir,shoj,ssgi}, where the deBroglie-Bohm theme was expanded.
Some possible cosmological
aspects of such a quantum nature, or as a quantum structure appended to a more classical universe,
are indicated following here Israelit and Rosen \cite{isrt,istr,itis,itrs,isrn,rosn}.
\\[3mm]\indent
In \cite{c006,c007,c009,cl,crar,clrr} we discussed an integrable Weyl-Dirac
theory in a Weyl integrable space time (WIST) with a Dirac-Weyl action based on
\begin{equation}\label{1.1}
I=\int\sqrt{-g}d^4x\left[W^{\lambda\mu}W_{\lambda\mu}-\beta^2R+\sigma\beta^2w^{\lambda}w_{\lambda}+(\sigma+6)
(\partial\beta)^2+\right.
\end{equation}
$$\left.+2\sigma\beta w^{\lambda}\beta_{\lambda}+2\Lambda\beta^4\right]$$
for arbitrary $\sigma$
(following \cite{dirc,isrt,istr,itis,itrs,isrn,rosn}).  Note that the term $(\partial\beta)^2=(\partial_{\lambda}\beta)(\partial_{\lambda}\beta)$ looks curious
but it follows from tensor calculations.
It arises e.g. from a Weyl gauge covariant derivative
of the form $({\bf 1A})\,\,\beta_{||\lambda}=\partial_{\lambda}\beta+\beta w_{\lambda}=-\beta_{\lambda}$ on p.39 in \cite{isrt}
(here $w_{\lambda}=-2\partial log(\beta)$) via e.g. $\beta_{||\underline{\kappa}}\beta_{||\kappa}=\beta^{\kappa}\beta_{\kappa}\sim
(-\beta_{\kappa})^2$ (cf. also \cite{c009}).
We follow here the notation in \cite{isrt} and note that
$\beta^{\mu}\beta_{\mu}\sim g^{\mu\kappa}\beta_{\kappa}\beta_{\mu}=\beta_{\underline{\kappa}}\beta_{\kappa}$ means that the underlined index is raised.  This may
generate some confusion in comparing formulas from \cite{isrt,istr,itis,itrs,isrn,rosn}
(where there is a great deal of sometimes conflicting notation) and let us
emphasize that we stay in a WIST model with $b_{\lambda}=0$ and $w_{\lambda}=-2\partial_{\lambda}log(\beta)$.
\\[3mm]\indent
Now we have temporarily omitted a matter term $L_M$ and assume
only a quantum matter field $\beta\sim {\mathfrak M}$ (as indicated below in (1.4)).
For Weyl vector one uses $w_{\lambda}=\partial_{\lambda}w$ and there is no loss of generality in using $W_{\lambda}=w_{\lambda}+b_{\lambda}$ with $b_{\lambda}=
c\partial_{\lambda}log(\beta)$.  However we will take $w_{\lambda}=-2\partial_{\lambda} log(\beta)=-2\beta_{\lambda}/\beta$ (cf.
\cite{bqcd} to confirm) and in (1.1) there will then be
$\sigma$-terms $({\bf 1B})\,\,w^{\lambda}(-2\sigma\beta\gb_{\lambda}+2\sigma\beta\gb_{\lambda})$ which cancel.
Hence, with no additional $b_{\lambda}$ term
we arrive at (cf. \cite{isrt})
\begin{equation}\label{1.2}
I=\int\sqrt{-g}d^4x\left[-\beta^2R+(\sigma+6)(\partial\beta)^2+2\Lambda\beta^4\right]
\end{equation}
and one takes now $\sigma+6\sim k$ in order to capture the form of the action
for a WIST (cf. \cite{isrt}, book and paper).
Note that ({\bf 1B}) corrects a too hurried argument in Remark 2.1 of \cite{clrr}
(v1 and v2) with the same conclusion.  We mention again here some book corrections
from \cite{clrr} in:
\\[4mm]\indent
{\bf REMARK 1.1}
Recall that there is a typo in equation (6.7), p. 59 (and in (3.33), p. 237) in \cite{c009},
namely $3-4\alpha$ should be $6-4\alpha$.  Also on pp. 58-59 and 236-237 one should have
$\phi=exp(\psi)=\hat{\phi}^{-1}=\Omega^2=(\beta/m)^2=({\mathfrak M}/m)^2$ consistently and $L_M$ should be deleted in (6.6)-(6.7), p. 59 and (3.32)-(3.33), p. 237.  A multiplier $\hat{\phi}^2$
should also be added to ({\bf 6C}) on p. 59 and to $(\bigstar)$ on p. 237 while (3.34) on p. 237 and (6.8) on p. 59 should have $(\sigma+6)(\partial\beta)^2$.
Also
in \cite{crar},
on p. 169, line -7, one should change $\psi$ to $-\psi$, and note that the choice of
comparison actions on p. 171, equation (52), was too constrained; we should have
used the integrable Weyl-Dirac action (2.9) above with arbitrary $\sigma$.
Also in \cite{crar}, p. 157, equation (51) should have $6-4\alpha$ and on p. 167, line 13,
insert: $\cdots\,\,u\,\, in\,\, (\bullet\bullet)\,\, denotes\,\, \cdots$.  $\blacksquare$
\\[3mm]\indent
It was shown in \cite{c006,c007,c009} how the above situation arises from quantum
mechanics following \cite{audr,agsn,aula,cstr,nold,satm,shoj,whlr}.  It is deeply
connected with quantum trajectories, Bohmian style mechanics, geodesics,
and Weyl geometry.  Further there seem to be many good reasons for thinking
of gravity as intrinsically quantum mechanical (see e.g. \cite{bdmh,mnhm,mnnm,mnnh,mnob,mnkz}).  In this spirit we would like to imagine
a toy universe in some stage of evolution where cosmology could be related to the action in (1.2).  Such action integrals (with additional terms including e.g. $L_M$) have come up in work of Israelit and Rosen for
example along with associated Friedmann equations (cf. \cite{isrt,istr,itis,itrs,isrn,
rosn}) and the gauge function $\beta$ (which properly inserted in their work can generate the effects of
dark matter, quintessence, dark energy, etc.)
plays different roles in different epochs of
universe evolution.  For a recent sketch of such development we refer to \cite{itrs} for
example.  For cosmology one looks at $a(t)$ in a FRW metric
\begin{equation}\label{1.3}
ds^2=dt^2-a^2(t)\left[\frac{dr^2}{1-kr^2}+r^2d\Sigma^2\right]
\end{equation}
and we choose $w_{\lambda}=-2\partial_{\lambda}\beta$ as above for the Weyl geometry (note
automatically $W_{\mu\nu}=0$) and we imagine $b_{\lambda}=0$ so that $W_{\lambda}
=w_{\lambda}$.  Given the origins of (1.1) we then have
\begin{equation}\label{1.4}
\beta^2=m^2 exp({\mathcal Q});\,\,{\mathcal Q}=\frac{\hbar^2}{m^2}\frac{\Box |\Psi |}
{|\Psi |}
\end{equation}
and $({\bf 1C})\,\,\beta^2/m^2=\Omega^2=\phi=exp(\psi)=\hat{\phi}^{-1}$
which implies $({\bf 1D})\,\,\psi={\mathcal Q}=2[log(\beta)-log(m)]\Rightarrow \dot{{\mathcal Q}}
=2\dot{\beta}/\beta$ (note $c=1$ is used in \cite{isrt} and in (1.4) ${\mathcal Q}$ seems to have
acquired both plus and minus signs at various places in \cite{c007,c009}, apparently
due to signature changes).
In the FRW framework we need imagine only that we are in a
WIST phase (Weyl integrable spacetime)
where $W_{\mu\nu}=0$ and ${\mathcal Q}={\mathcal Q}(t)$ (or ${\mathcal Q}=
{\mathcal Q}(a(t))$) is involved.  Note that ${\mathfrak M}$ is a relativistic (or conformal) mass
and represents the quantum effects on the motion of a relativistic particle of mass
$m$ (i.e. the particle geodesics are ``quantum" and are expressed via a Weyl
geometry - cf. \cite{c007,c009}).  We assume that our toy universe has reached
a stage where the conformal or quantum effects have stabilized enough spatially so that
${\mathcal Q}={\mathcal Q}(a(t))$ can be assumed.
\\[3mm]\indent
{\bf REMARK 1.2}
In \cite{isrt,istr,itis,itrs,isrn,rosn}
there is some discussion of
local dark matter (Weylons $\sim$ Proca bosons) being generated by a Weyl field $W_{\mu\nu}$ but we do not want to
develop this here.  Rather we look only at global situations involving WIST.
For formulas involving tensors and details for general relativity we recommend \cite{crml}.  $\blacksquare$
\\[3mm]\indent
We recall from \cite{c009,clrr} or \cite{caro} (0705.3921 and 0712.3251) that I in (1.2) was related
to a Brans-Dicke (BD) type theory, in a reduced form as ($\alpha\sim \omega+(1/2)$)
\begin{equation}\label{1.5}
S_{MS}=\int d^4x\sqrt{-g}\left[R-\alpha(\nabla\psi)^2+16\pi L_M\right]
\end{equation}
(which is simply GR and an extra scalar (dilaton) - cf. \cite{mgsk}).  Then following \cite{quir} (hep-th 0009169) and \cite{bqcd} (where a slightly different notation is adopted) one used the conformal transformation
$\Omega^2=exp(\psi)=\phi$ to transform this into
\begin{equation}\label{1.6}
\hat{S}_4=\int d^4x\sqrt{-\hat{g}}e^{-\psi}\left[\hat{R}-\left(\alpha-\frac{3}{2}\right)(\hat{\nabla}\psi)^2+
16\pi e^{-\psi}L_M\right]
\end{equation}
This is called a string form in \cite{quir} and it is referred to as conformal GR.  In fact in
\cite{quir} it is shown that it is the only (generic) theory of gravitation which is invariant
under point dependent transformations of units (length, time, and mass).  It is also a WIST
theory (cf. \cite{bqcd,c009,caar,caro,clrr,quir} for more details).  The form (1.6) is the one used in \cite
{clrr} (without $L_M$) and written out in our notation it becomes ($[(\hat{\nabla}\psi)^2\hat{\phi}=
(\hat{\nabla}\hat{\phi})^2/\hat{\phi}]$
\begin{equation}\label{1.7}
\hat{S}_4=\int d^4x\sqrt{-\hat{g}}\left[\hat{\phi}\hat{R}-\left(\alpha-\frac{3}{2}\right)\frac{(\hat{\nabla}\hat{\phi})^2}{\hat{\phi}}+16\pi\hat{\phi}^2L_M\right]
\end{equation}
In \cite{clrr} this action is then related to (1.2) and one finds that $\sigma=-4\alpha$.  We note also
that this is the form considered in \cite{chla} where Friedmann equations are discussed (cf.
also Section 2 and \cite{caro} - math-ph 0712.3251).

\section{COSMOLOGY AND QUANTUM THEORY}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{2.\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}

Another way to work the quantum action (1.2) into a cosmological framework would be to
consider conformally coupled QM (quantum matter) as in \cite{isrt,isrn} where one coupled dark matter DM (cf. also \cite{csto}).
First one could dismiss $W_{\mu\nu}$ terms as irrelevant for cosmology
(here $W_{\mu\nu}=0$ automatically of course) and then,
following pp. 97-112 in \cite{isrt} (with slight modifications) look at the conformal (now quantum) space (1.2) appended to an Einstein gravity term of general form $({\bf 2A})\,\,I_E=
\int[R+L_M]\sqrt{-g}d^4x$.  This can be achieved by adding terms $\int (R+ L_M)\sqrt{-g}d^4x$ to
(1.1) and considering the coupled action
(with $W_{\mu\nu}=0$ and $w_{\lambda}=-2\partial_{\lambda}log(\beta)=-2\beta_{\lambda}/\beta$)
\begin{equation}\label{2.1}
I=\int[R-\beta^2R+(\sigma+6)(\beta_{\lambda})^2+2\Lambda\beta^4+L_M]\sqrt{-g}d^4x
\end{equation}
Then we can use the calculations as in \cite{isrt,itrs}.  We follow \cite{crml} for some formulas
and write $({\bf 2B})\,\,\delta(\sqrt{-g}R)=[R_{\mu\nu}-(1/2)g_{\mu\nu}R]\sqrt{-g}\delta^{\mu\nu}=
G_{\mu\nu}\sqrt{-g}\delta g^{\mu\nu}$.  Recall index shifts such as $T^{\mu\nu}=g^{\mu\alpha}g^{\nu\gamma}T_{\alpha\gamma}$ and one has also $({\bf 2C})\,\,\delta(\sqrt{-g})=-(1/2)\sqrt{-g}g_{\mu\nu}\delta g^{\mu\nu}$.
Here some key features from \cite{crml} are ($g^{\sigma\mu}g_{\mu\nu}=\delta^{\sigma}_{\nu}$ with
$\delta^{\mu}_{\mu}=4$)
\begin{equation}\label{2.2}
g^{\mu\nu}g_{\mu\nu}=4;\,\,\delta g=g g^{\mu\nu}\delta g_{\mu\nu};\,\,\frac{\partial g}{\partial g_{\mu\nu}}=
-gg^{\mu\nu};\,\,g^{\mu\nu}\delta g_{\mu\nu}=-g_{\mu\nu}\delta g^{\mu\nu}
\end{equation}
One writes $\Psi=\delta L_M/\delta\beta=0$ for the ``charge" of the $\beta$ field and
(assuming $L_M=L_M(g_{ab})$ only) we recall that $({\bf 2D})\,\,\delta\sqrt{-g}=
-(1/2)\sqrt{-g}g_{\mu\nu}\delta g^{\mu\nu}$.  Then under variation in $g^{\mu\nu}$
one has
\begin{equation}\label{2.3}
-\beta^2R\sqrt{-g}\to (1-\beta^2)\sqrt{-g}G_{\mu\nu}\delta g^{\mu\nu};
\end{equation}
$$2\Lambda\beta^4\sqrt{-g}\to-\Lambda\beta^4\sqrt{-g}g_{\mu\nu}\delta g^{\mu\nu};\,\,L_M\sqrt{-g}\to
 -\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{-g}T^M_{\mu\nu}\delta g^{\mu\nu}=$$
$$=\frac{\delta(\sqrt{-g}L_M)}{\delta g^{\mu\nu}}\delta g^{\mu\nu}
\sim-\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{-g}T_M^{\mu\nu}=\frac{\delta(\sqrt{-g}L_M}{\delta g_{\mu\nu}}\delta g_{\mu\nu}$$
while (cf. \cite{crml,isrt,istr,itrs,rosn}),
\begin{equation}\label{2.4}
(\sigma+6)(\beta_{\lambda})^2\sqrt{-g}
\to (\sigma+6)(\partial_{\lambda}\beta)^2\left(-\frac{\sqrt{-g}}{2}\right)g_{\mu\nu}\delta g^{\mu\nu}
\end{equation}
leading to the EM tensor $T^{\beta}$ for the $\beta$ field implicitly defined via
\begin{equation}\label{2.5}
(1-\beta^2)G_{\mu\nu}-g_{\mu\nu}\beta^4\Lambda+T^M_{\mu\nu}-\frac{\sigma+6}{2}
(\partial_{\lambda}\beta)^2g_{\mu\nu}=0
\end{equation}
Thus it appears that $({\bf 2E})\,\,T^{\beta}_{\mu\nu}=-(\sigma+6)(1/2)(\partial_{\lambda}\beta)^2g_{\mu\nu}
-\beta^2G_{\mu\nu}-g_{\mu\nu}\beta^4\Lambda$.
For variation in the $\beta$ field we would like to take $\Psi=0$ and we
note formally (since $\nabla_{\lambda}\sqrt{-g}=0$),
$2\int\sqrt{-g}\beta_{\lambda}(\delta\nabla_{\lambda}\beta)\sim 2\int \beta_{\lambda}\sqrt{-g}\,\nabla_{\lambda}(\delta\beta)\to
-2\int\sqrt{-g}\,\beta_{\lambda;\lambda}\,\delta\beta$).  Consequently in (2.5)
\begin{equation}\label{2.6}
-\beta^2R\to 2\beta R\delta\beta;\,\,(\sigma+6)\beta_{\lambda}^2\to -2[(\sigma+6)\beta_{\lambda;\lambda}]
\delta\beta;\,\,2\Lambda\beta^4\to 8\Lambda\beta^3\delta\beta
\end{equation}
which means that (note $\beta_{\lambda;\lambda}\equiv \beta_{,\lambda;\lambda}\equiv \beta_{;\lambda;\lambda}$ and $\beta_{\lambda;\lambda}$ will
involve Christoffel symbols $\Gamma^{\lambda}_{\alpha\kappa}$ for $g_{\alpha\kappa}$ where $\nabla_{\lambda}V_{\kappa}=\partial_{\lambda}
V_{\kappa}-\Gamma^{\alpha}_{\lambda\kappa}V_{\alpha}$)
\begin{equation}\label{2.7}
\beta R-(\sigma+6)\beta_{\lambda;\lambda}+4\Lambda\beta^3=0
\end{equation}
Taking $\Lambda=0$ this can be compared to (6.74) in \cite{isrt} where $\beta_{\lambda;\lambda}+(1/6)\beta R
=0$ (cf. also \cite{istr}), so we are essentially replacing 6 by $(\sigma+6)$.  Note here
for $\Lambda=0$ one has $({\bf 2F})\,\,
T^{\beta}=Tr(T^{\beta}_{\mu\nu})=\beta^2R-2(\sigma+6)(\beta_{\lambda})^2$ since $Tr(G_{\mu\nu})=-R$
and hence from (2.5) $-R+T^{\beta}+T^M=0$ leading to
\begin{equation}\label{2.8}
T^{\beta}+T^M=R=\frac{(\sigma+6)}{\beta}\beta_{\lambda;\lambda}=(\sigma+6)\left[\frac{\beta_{\lambda;\lambda}}{\beta}-
2\left(\frac{\partial_{\lambda}\beta}{\beta}\right)^2\right]
\end{equation}
which indicates that the behavior of the conformally coupled $\beta$ field is related to
$L_M$ (as well as to its quantum mechanical origin).
\\[3mm]\indent
{\bf REMARK 2.1.}
One should distinguish between in $\beta$ (2.1) and the $\beta$
field arising
in (1.1).  In (1.1) $\beta$ is an additional dynamical variable reflecting a quantum mass ${\mathfrak M}$
with $L_M\sim 0$ and we were speaking only
of a special Dirac field $\beta$ with no coupling to standard gravity (GR).
In the full Weyl-Dirac theory as in e.g. \cite{isrt} it is assumed that $L_M=L_M(w_{\mu},\beta_{\mu},
g_{\mu\nu})$ and $\beta$ can be arbitrary.  The $\beta$ field equation will then be a corollary
of the other equations that arise.
In the explicitly coupled situations as in (2.1) relations like (2.8) will arise
in (2.1) and represent  ``behavioral stipulations" on $\beta$.  $\blacksquare$
\\[3mm]\indent
In \cite{caro} (0712.3251) we discussed
the Friedmann equations for a version of $\hat{S}_4$ following \cite{chla,fara} which we
now apply to (1.1)-(1.2) based on quantum mechanics.
We note that (1.7) is in fact a BD theory which can be written (removing the ``hats")
\begin{equation}\label{2.9}
S=\frac{1}{16\pi}\int d^4x\sqrt{-g}\left[R\Phi-\omega\frac{(\nabla\Phi)^2}{\Phi}+{\mathcal L}_M\right]
\end{equation}
where ${\mathcal L}_M={\mathcal L}_M(g_{ab},\Phi)$.  This can be written in the form $({\bf 2G})\,\,
{\mathcal L}_M=-V(\Phi)+16\pi {\mathfrak L}_M$ (a cosmological constant $\Lambda$ can be suitably inserted in
${\mathcal L}$) and then following \cite{caro} - (0712.3251), based on
\cite{chla,fara}, the Friedmann equations can be generated as follows (from \cite{fara}, pp.
9-11).  We use the FRW metric (1.3) and first write general field equations
\begin{equation}\label{2.10}
G_{ab}=\frac{8\pi}{\Phi}T^M_{ab}+\frac{\omega}{\Phi^2}\left[\nabla_a\Phi\nabla_b\Phi -\frac{1}{2}
g_{ab}\nabla^c\Phi\nabla_c\Phi+\right]
\end{equation}
$$+\frac{1}{\Phi}(\nabla_a\nabla_b\phi-g_{ab}\Box\Phi)-\frac{V}{2\Phi}g_{ab}$$
where $({\bf 2H})\,\,T^M_{ab}=-(2/\sqrt{-g})(\delta/\delta g^{ab})(\sqrt{-g}{\mathfrak L}_M)$.  Variation of the action with
respect to $\Phi$ gives
\begin{equation}\label{2.11}
\frac{2\omega}{\Phi}\Box\Phi+R-\frac{\omega}{\Phi^2}\nabla^c\Phi\nabla_c\Phi-\frac{dV}{d\Phi}=0
\end{equation}
with trace
\begin{equation}\label{2.12}
R=-\frac{8\pi T_M}{\Phi}+\frac{\omega}{\Phi^2}\nabla^c\Phi\nabla_c\Phi+\frac{3\Box\Phi}{\Phi}+\frac{2V}{\Phi}
\end{equation}
and using (2.12) to eliminate R from (2.11) yields
\begin{equation}\label{2.13}
\Box\Phi=\frac{1}{2\omega+3}\left[8\pi T^M+\Phi\frac{dV}{d\Phi}-2V\right]
\end{equation}
Then using (1.3) one obtains $({\bf 2I})\,\,\nabla^c\Phi\nabla_c\Phi=-(\dot{\Phi})^2$ and $\Box\Phi=-(\ddot{\Phi}+3H\dot{\Phi})=-(1/a^3)(d/dt)(a^3\dot{\Phi})$.  Assume now that $({\bf 2J})\,\,T^M_{ab}=(P^M+\rho^M)u_au_b+P^Mg_{ab}$ and then the time dependent component of the BD field equations
gives a constraint equation
\begin{equation}\label{2.14}
H^2=\frac{8\pi}{3\Phi}+\frac{\omega}{6}\left(\frac{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi}\right)^2-H\frac{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi}-
\frac{k}{a^2}+\frac{V}{6\Phi}
\end{equation}
Then, using $R=6[\dot{H}+2H^2+(k/a^2)]$, there results
\begin{equation}\label{2.15}
\dot{H}+2H^2+\frac{k}{a^2}=-\frac{4\pi T^M}{3\Phi}-\frac{\omega}{6}\left(\frac{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi}\right)^2
+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\Box\Phi}{\Phi}+\frac{V}{3\Phi}
\end{equation}
From (2.14), (2.13), and the trace equation $({\bf 2K})\,\,T^M=3P^M-\rho^M$ one has then
\begin{equation}\label{2.16}
\dot{H}=\frac{-8\pi}{(2\omega+3)\Phi}\left[(\omega+2)\rho^M+\omega P^M\right]-\frac{\omega}{2}\left(\frac
{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi}\right)^2+
\end{equation}
$$+2H\frac{\dot{\Phi}}{\Phi}+\frac{k}{a^2}+\frac{2}{2(2\omega+3)\Phi}\left(\Phi\frac{dV}{d\Phi}
-2V\right)$$
and the (2.13) reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{2.17}
\ddot{\Phi}+3H\dot{\Phi}=\frac{1}{2\omega+3}\left[8\pi(\rho^M-3P^M)-\Phi\frac{dV}{d\Phi}+2V\right]
\end{equation}
\\[3mm]\indent
In order to apply this to our model (1.2) we look at these Friedmann equations for $\Phi=\hat{\phi}$
where $(\beta^2/m^2)=\hat{\phi}^{-1}=exp(\psi)=exp({\mathcal Q})$.  Then $\hat{\phi}=exp(-{\mathcal Q})=\Phi$ and equations (2.10)-(2.17) can be written in terms of the quantum potential  ${\mathcal Q}$ from (1.4).
We assume first that ${\mathfrak L}_M=0$ and then one can write $({\bf 2L})\,\,\dot{\Phi}=-\dot{{\mathcal Q}}
\Phi,\,\,\ddot{\Phi}=(\dot{{\mathcal Q}}^2-\ddot{{\mathcal Q}})\Phi$ and thence e.g.
\begin{equation}\label{2.18}
(\dot{{\mathcal Q}}^2-\ddot{{\mathcal Q}})\Phi-3H\dot{{\mathcal Q}}\Phi=\frac{1}{2\omega+3}\left[8\pi
(\rho^M-3P^M)-\Phi\frac{dV}{d\Phi}+2V\right]
\end{equation}
Note that $({\bf 2M})\,\,\omega=\alpha-(3/2)$ and $\sigma=-4\alpha\Rightarrow \omega=-(1/4)(\sigma+6)$
and $2\omega+3=-(\sigma/2$.
We see that the dynamics of $\Phi$ is determined in part by $V(dV/d\Phi)-2V$ (which vanishes
for $V=c\Phi^2=cexp(-2{\mathcal Q})$) and by $\rho^M,\,\,P^M$.  Thus, in
particular, it is possible to envision some cosmological behavior provided by a quantum background as in (1.2).  We note also that Mannheim refers to intrinsically quantum mechanical gravity associated to general Weyl geometry with the Weyl tensor, etc. (cf. \cite{bdmh,mnhm,mnnm,mnnh,mnob,mnkz}).
\\[3mm]\indent
{\bf REMARK 2.2.}
In \cite{shoj,ssgi}, where Bohmian aspects are emphasized,  there are joint field equations involving the conformal factor $\Omega^2$ (expressed via $\phi$ or $\phi^{-1}$) and the quantum potential ${\mathcal Q}$ (expressed separately via a Lagrangian) with the goal of thereby deriving connections between ${\mathcal Q}$ and $\phi$.
Some of this is also reviewed in \cite{c006,
c007}.  A main conclusion of this is that the quantum potential is a dynamical field and interactions
between $\Lambda$ and ${\mathcal Q}$ represent a connection between large and small scale
structures.  This latter feature is exhibited in our context via the presence of $\Lambda$ in (2.7)
along with $\beta$.  We note also from
\cite{novl} that $\Lambda$ plays an important role in generating mass for scalar fields.  $\blacksquare$
\\[3mm]\indent
Relations between thermodynamics and gravity have been extensively studied following
work of Bekenstein \cite{beck}, Hawking \cite{hawk}, Jacobson \cite{jacb}, and Padmanabhan
\cite{pada,padn,pdbh,padm}.  One can derive general Einstein field equations via thermodynamic
principles and gravity itself seems to be characterized via thermodynamics (see \cite{c009}
for a brief sketch of some of this and there is much more information in works of Padmanabhan
et al.  The work of Verlinde \cite{vlde} has triggered another explosion of interest in entropy
and gravity and we mention here only a few articles,
namely \cite{ccoh,ccsh,danl,shki,wlwg} (related to the Friedmann equations - cf. also
\cite{akci,cai} for earlier work) and \cite{makl,mkmr,smol} (for relations to quantum mechanics).
\\[3mm]\indent
We would like to mention here that entropy in quantum mechanics is normally connected
to momentum fluctuations and the quantum potential gives rise to an entropy functional
$\int P{\mathfrak Q}\,dx$ corresponding to Fisher information (here $P=|\psi|^2$ where $\psi$ is a wave function and ${\mathfrak Q}$ represents a 3-dimensional quantum potential).  Generally
${\mathfrak Q}$ can be described e.g. via an osmotic velocity or a thermalization of this (cf. \cite{c006,c007,c009,crow,fred,gros,hall,hlrg,hkrg}).  There is also a gravitational version of this
related to the Wheeler-deWitt (WDW) framework in the form
\begin{equation}\label{2.19}
\int {\mathcal D}h\,P{\mathfrak Q}=\int {\mathcal D}h\frac{\delta P^{1/2}}{\delta h_{ij}}G_{ijk\ell}\frac{\delta P^{1/2}}
{\delta h_{k\ell}}
\end{equation}
(cf. \cite{crcl,c007,c009,fred,hkrg}) and see \cite{glka} for an entirely different point of view
(sketched in \cite{c009}); a classical treatment of WDW is given e.g in \cite{kief}
and some conformal aspects of the ADM approach are indicated in \cite{wanc}.
We note also the Perelman entropy functional
\begin{equation}\label{2.20}
{\mathfrak F}=\int_M(R+|\nabla f|^2)e^{-f}dV
\end{equation}
and corresponding Ricci flows are related to a so called Nash entropy $({\bf 2N})\,\,S=
\int u\,log(u)\,dV$ where $u=exp(-f)$ and various aspects of quantum mechanics related to
the Schr\"odinger and Weyl geometry arise (cf. \cite{c009,caar,caro,graf,khol,perl}).

\newpage


\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}

Galaxy evolution and formation are dependent on stellar mass and environment.  The build up of stellar mass in the early universe occurred rapidly, resulting in massive galaxies with old stellar populations detected by $z = 2$.  The global star formation history of the universe indicates that as star formation rates (SFRs) in high mass galaxies decreased steeply from $z=2$ to 1, the most active sites of star formation shifted to progressively lower mass galaxies over time \citep{Cowie96,BE00,Bauer05,Juneau2005}.  The environmental effect is that galaxies in high-density regions tend to be older and form stars on shorter time scales than those in lower-density regions \citep{Butcher84,Dressler97,Poggianti99,Thomas05}.  Therefore the dense regions of distant galaxy clusters are ideal environments to study the first galaxies in the universe to stop forming stars.

Studies of clusters at intermediate redshifts have found strong evidence that star formation has shut off in the central regions.  Observations of the well-studied galaxy cluster RXJ0152.7-1357 at $z=0.83$ show that galaxies towards the centre are redder and harbour older stellar populations \citep{Jorgensen2005,Demarco2005,Tanaka2005,Marcillac2007,Patel2009} than galaxies in the lower density outskirts.  A similar result was found by \citet{Koyama09} for the RXJ1716.4+6708 cluster at $z=0.81$, although a different technique was employed.  \citet{Koyama09} used narrow-band H$\alpha$ imaging and found no H$\alpha$ emitters within a radius of 0.25 Mpc of the cluster core.  \citet{Finn05} also use H$\alpha$ to study three clusters at $z=0.7-0.8$.  They find that two of the three clusters show a decrease in H$\alpha$ fraction towards cluster centre, indicating that star formation has largely shut off inside the core of these intermediate redshift clusters.

Recently, studies of high redshift clusters have investigated the presence of a relation between star formation and the distance from the cluster centre.  In the RDCS J1252.9-2927 cluster at $z = 1.24$, \citet{Tanaka2009} find a population of star-forming galaxies at the outskirts of the cluster, which are absent from the cluster core.  These results differ from the work of \citet{Hayashi10} who observe one of the most distant clusters known, XMMXCS J2215.9-1738 at $z=1.46$, and find no evidence for decreasing SFRs towards the cluster core.  The period of $z=1.0-1.5$ is crucial for understanding the shut down of star formation in cluster galaxies.

In this study, we investigate galaxies inside the most massive distant galaxy cluster yet detected, XMMU J2235.3-2557  (``XMMU2235'') at $z=1.393$.   This distant galaxy cluster was discovered serendipitously by the orbiting XMM-Newton X-ray telescope by \citet{Mullis05} and remains one of the highest redshift clusters known.   \citet{Rosati2009} confirm cluster membership of 34 individual galaxies in XMMU2235 based on spectroscopic data.  Different methods have been used to estimate the total mass within 1 Mpc for XMMU2235.  \citet{Jee2009} estimate the projected mass to be $(8.5\pm 1.7) \times 10^{14}\Msun$ from a weak lensing study, which is consistent  with the projected X-ray mass calculated by \citet{Rosati2009} who find M$_{tot,proj}$~=~$(9.3~\pm~2.1)~\times~10^{14}\Msun$, making this the most massive galaxy cluster known at $z>1$.

\citet{Lidman2008} created a near-IR colour-magnitude diagram of XMMU2235 using VLT observations and found that galaxies detected in the core of the cluster are red, while galaxies surrounding the core show much more diverse properties.  They also use simple stellar population models to determine that galaxies in the core of XMMU2235 are already old, with typical ages of 3 Gyr.  \citet{Rosati2009} examine spectra taken with VLT of 16 spectroscopically-identified galaxies that have no [OII] emission.  They stack the spectra into two bins based on the distance from the cluster centre, then fit SED models to derive star formation histories.  They find that galaxies in the core are consistent with having experienced a single burst of star formation at $z=5.3$, while passive galaxies beyond 200 kpc of the cluster centre show signatures of more extended periods of star formation, lasting possibly to redshifts of $z=2$.

In this paper, we present  narrow-band $H$ (1.57$\mu$m) observations of XMMU2235, which correspond to the wavelength region where galaxies in this cluster emit H$\alpha$.  We measure for the first time individual SFRs for 82 galaxies in XMMU2235 out to a cluster radius of 500 kpc.  In Section~$\ref{sec:data}$, we describe the near-infrared observations of the cluster, data reduction, and the calculation of star formation rates.  We discuss our results in Section~$\ref{sec:results}$, present a discussion in Section~$\ref{sec:discussion}$, and end with a summary and conclusions in Section~\ref{sec:summ}.

Throughout the paper we assume the standard $\Lambda$CDM cosmology, a flat universe with $\Omega_\Lambda = 0.73$,  $\Omega_M = 0.27$ and a Hubble constant of $H_0 = 72 $ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$.

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.36\textwidth, angle=270]{figure1}
\caption{Transmission curve of the $\lambda 1.57 \mu$m narrow-band filter (dotted line), projected to show redshift coverage, overplotted with the redshift histogram (red line) of known spectroscopic cluster members from \citet{Rosati2009}. \label{fig:filter}}
\end{figure}

\section{Observations and data reduction}\label{sec:data}

\subsection{Observations}\label{sec:observations}

We obtained observations of the XMMU2235 galaxy cluster with the Near InfraRed Imager and Spectrometer \citep[NIRI,][]{Hodapp03} on Gemini North.  The data presented in this paper originate from the Gemini program GN-2007B-Q-79, observed in queue mode in the period from UT 2007 July 11 to UT 2007 September 30.  The $H$ narrow-band filter of NIRI at a wavelength of $\lambda=1.57 \mu$m, corresponds to the central wavelength of the H$\alpha\lambda6563\mathrm{\AA}$ emission line at the cluster redshift of $z=1.39$.  Figure~\ref{fig:filter} shows the redshift histogram of known cluster members from \citet{Rosati2009} overplotted with the transmission curve of the $H$ narrow-band filter, projected to show redshift coverage. $H$  broad-band observations at $\lambda=1.65 \mu$m were also obtained to measure the underlying continuum.

We observed one pointing of XMMU2235, centred on the coordinates of the brightest cluster galaxy (BCG). The total integration time was split into single exposures of 120 seconds in the $H$ narrow-band and 30 seconds in the $H$ broad-band filter. To remove cosmic rays and bad pixels, each exposure in a set of 10 exposures was offset from the previous one following a fixed dither pattern. The field of view for each single frame is 120$\times$120 arcseconds with a pixel scale of 0.1162 arcsec/pixel.

In total 302 individual $H$ narrow-band and 115 $H$ broad-band exposures were observed. Some of the broad band images and a substantial part of the narrow band exposures suffered from strong fringing, the known NIRI first-frame-bias pattern, and variations in the sky background that could not be removed by the sky subtraction procedure described below. Only frames with a satisfactory sky subtraction were used to construct the combined final image.
This results in a total number of 212 narrow-band exposures and 110 broad-band exposures, corresponding to 424 minutes ($\sim$7 hours) total narrow-band integration time and 55 minutes total broad-band integration time.

Our field of view has a diameter of $\sim 850$ kpc and therefore covers $\sim 400$ kpc in all directions and up to $\sim 550$ kpc along the diagonal. As already noted by \citet{Lidman2008}, the spatial structure of the cluster is elongated at a roughly 45$^\circ$ along the diagonal of our image. This elongation was also reported by \citet{Rosati2009} studying the extended X-ray emission from the Intra Cluster Medium (ICM).

\subsection{Data Reduction}\label{sec:reduction}

The data were reduced with the Gemini IRAF \footnote[1]{IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatory, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy (AURA) under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation.  The Gemini IRAF package is distributed by Gemini Observatory, which is operated by AURA.} package following standard data reduction procedures.  All images were prepared for the pipeline with the {\tt niprepare} task which adds certain keywords to the image header. Two sets of flat fields were observed each night in each filter. The corresponding flat field exposures were combined and used to create a bad pixel mask for the science exposures with {\tt niflat}.  The most critical procedure is the sky subtraction which is done with {\tt nisky}. Sky images are produced by combining a set of science exposures after masking and subtracting detected objects. Since the sky in the near infrared is very bright as well as variable on time-scales of a couple minutes, only frames that are taken close enough to each other in time are combined. After trying different configurations and comparing the resulting background noise in the sky subtracted image, we find that the best solution for constructing the sky image for each science frame is to combine the frame itself with the four closest exposures. This corresponds to an exposure time of 10 minutes for each combined sky image.

After applying flat field and bad pixel corrections as well as the sky subtraction with the {\tt nireduce} task, all frames of the same filter were combined into a single final science image. To stack the images with the optimal accuracy, first all images taken at one dither position were combined. This has the advantage that the co-adding does not rely on the astrometry of the single images, where almost no sources that could be used to optimize the co-adding are visible. Since the sources in all images at the same dither position have identical image coordinates they can be directly combined into higher signal-to-noise sub-stacks. These 10 sub-stacks (from the 10 different dither positions) of about 20 exposures each were then combined into the final co-added science image  with {\tt imcoadd}. This procedure worked very well for broad-band frames, while for the narrow-band images small offsets between the images that were supposed to be at identical positions were necessary. Only frames with a good sky-subtraction without residuals of fringing, first-frame-bias pattern or sky variability were stacked, resulting in a number of 212 and 110 combined individual exposures in narrow-band and broad-band, respectively.  The final total exposure times are 55 minutes in the $H$ broad-band filter and 424 minutes in the $H$ narrow-band filter.

The combined images in broad and  narrow-band were then trimmed to cover the same field of view in both filters. Figure~\ref{fig:images} shows the two images in the $H$ broad-band (left panel) and narrow-band (right panel).  The images are $1.6$ arcmin $\times$ $1.64$ arcmin, corresponding to about 850 kpc at the cluster's distance. The pixel scale of 0.1162 arcsec/pixel and the angular distance scale at $z=1.39$ of 8.618 kpc/arcsec \citep{Wright2006} give a scale of about 1 kpc/pixel.

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figure2}
\caption{Final reduced, combined and trimmed images of XMMU2235. Left panel: $H$ broad-band image. Right panel: $\lambda  1.57 \mu$m  narrow-band image. The width of each image is $\sim1.6$ arcmin or 850 kpc. North is up, east to the left. The spectroscopically confirmed cluster members are marked with red boxes; all other detected objects are marked with blue circles. Objects additionally outlined in magenta are excess emission-line galaxies and most likely to be cluster members (see Figure~\ref{fig:ha_excess}).  The brightest cluster galaxy (BCG), which is also a spectroscopically confirmed member, is marked towards the  centre of each image with a red ellipse.  \label{fig:images}}
\end{figure*}

\subsection{Source detection}\label{sec:detection}

Sources are detected in the $H$ broad- and narrow-band images using {\tt SExtractor} (Bertin \& Arnouts 1996). To ensure that the different depth of broad- and  narrow-band images does not affect the results, fluxes are measured within the same fixed aperture in both images.  We run {\tt SExtractor} simultaneously on broad- and  narrow-band images, detecting sources in the broad-band image and measuring photometry using the same parameters in both images. The same procedure is repeated using the narrow-band image as the detection image, in order to detect pure emission line sources that might be too faint to be detected in broad-band. The two catalogs are then combined to obtain the final source catalog shown in Table~\ref{tab1}.
With this method the magnitude of a galaxy in both bands is calculated.  The procedure of detecting sources in both bands ensures that our sample is not biased towards H$\alpha$ emitting galaxies.

To minimise spurious detections we require a minimum number of 7 adjacent pixels to reside above the background noise by a signal-to-noise ($S/N$) of 2 in the narrow-band image. Obvious non-cluster member detections (e.g. on the edge of the image), stars and known foreground galaxies were removed from the catalog. Stars were excluded based on {\tt SExtractor's CLASS\_STAR} parameter: sources with {\tt CLASS\_STAR} $>$ 0.8 were excluded.
We use {\tt FLUX\_APER} to measure fluxes within a fixed circular aperture of 20 pixels diameter, corresponding to $2.3^{\prime\prime}$ or $\sim$20 kpc at the cluster distance.
We compare the use of {\tt FLUX\_APER} and {\tt FLUX\_AUTO} in Section~\ref{sec:aper_compare}.

Our final catalog comprises of 82 objects, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:images} in the broad-band (left) and narrow-band (right), including 10 spectroscopically confirmed cluster members outlined with red boxes.  The spectroscopically confirmed cluster members are taken from \citet{Mullis05}, \citet{Lidman2008}, and \citet{Rosati2009}.  \citet{Rosati2009} find 34 confirmed cluster members from spectra taken with the VLT in Chile covering an area on the sky of $2.0$ arcmin $\times$ $2.0$ arcmin, slightly larger than our coverage but with the same central pointing.  They do not list the coordinates of these objects in the paper.  In fact, none of these papers give object coordinates, but \citet{Mullis05} and \citet{Lidman2008} show images that identify spectroscopically confirmed members.  We compare these published images (Figure~1 in each paper) to our Figure~\ref{fig:images} to identify by eye 10 spectroscopically confirmed cluster members.

In the subsequent analysis we distinguish spectroscopically confirmed members (referred to as ``confirmed members'') and all other detections by plotting confirmed members in red.  The objects surrounded by an extra magenta symbol in Figure~\ref{fig:images} are galaxies identified as having excess line-emission and are therefore the most likely to be cluster members, as will be discussed in Section~\ref{sec:contaminants}.

The image depth and completeness limits of our broad-band and narrow-band images are estimated by placing artificial point sources in the images with the same noise characteristics as the observed images. The artificial point sources are created assuming a gaussian profile with the width of the point spread function (PSF) measured in the images. The full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the PSF is 6.3 pixels in the broad band image and 4.7 pixels in narrow band image. The same extraction procedure as described above is then run on the images with artificial point sources added. The 5$\sigma$ image depth is given by computing the magnitude of a point source with a flux of five times the background noise within the aperture used for galaxy photometry (10 pixel, $\sim 1$ arcsec radius). We obtain a 5$\sigma$ image depth of $H_{AB} = 24.3$ mag for the broad-band image and $H_{narrow,AB} = 23.3$ mag.  Using our detection criteria, all objects detected in the narrow-band image are also detected in the broad-band image.
The completeness limit is computed by comparing the number counts per magnitude of the artificial input catalog and the catalog of detected objects in both images. We obtain a 95\% completeness limit of $H_{AB} = 24.2$ mag in the broad-band and $H_{narrow,AB} = 23.4$ mag in the narrow band, values comparable to the 5$\sigma$ image depth.

\subsection{Flux calibration and Star Formation Rate}\label{sec:calibration}

To obtain pure, continuum-subtracted H$\alpha$ fluxes and then star formation rates from the measured fluxes in ADU, we adopted the following procedure: 1. obtain the flux calibration of the  broad-band images, 2. calculate the expected  narrow-band flux from a blackbody SED and relative broad-to- narrow-band throughputs, 3. subtract  broad-band from  narrow-band flux and 4. convert from H$\alpha$ flux (erg~s$^{-1}$) to star formation rates ($M_\odot$yr$^{-1}$).

In order to obtain the AB magnitude zeropoint for the $H$ broad-band images, we observed three standard star fields, taken from the \citet{Persson98} catalog available from the Gemini Observatory website, in both the broad and narrow-band filters.  The standard star counts are measured using {\tt IRAF} and converted to magnitudes applying a correction for airmass and extinction. The  broad-band zeropoint for each star is then computed by adding the measured magnitude to the catalog magnitude. This yields an average  broad-band zeropoint of $ZP_{broad} = 25.43\pm0.03$ magnitudes (AB).

We calculate the expected narrow-band flux of the standard stars using a blackbody SED and the ratio between broad- and  narrow-band throughputs. We assume a blackbody spectrum of the standard stars' respective temperature according to its spectral type. This SED is integrated over the response function plus atmospheric transmission of both broad- and  narrow-band filters. The ratio between expected broad- and  narrow-band flux is then used to compute the expected AB magnitude of the standard stars in the narrow-band. From the expected magnitude and the measured magnitude in the  narrow-band standard star images, we obtain the average  narrow-band zeropoint in AB magnitudes of $ZP_{narrow} = 22.27\pm0.05$ mag. The errors of the two zeropoints are the respective standard deviation of the three measurements of two different stars.

The object magnitudes obtained with the above zeropoints were converted to fluxes using the definition of AB magnitudes \citep{Oke74}:

\begin{equation}
m(AB) = -2.5 \log(flux) - 48.60,
\end{equation}

\noindent where flux is given in erg~s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ Hz$^{-1}$. The continuum subtraction is done by subtracting the  broad-band flux from the  narrow-band flux to get the pure H$\alpha$ fluxes. A dust correction of one magnitude is applied to the fluxes \citep{Kennicutt83}, as well as a statistical correction for the contribution of [N~II] emission by a factor of 0.77 \citep{Tresse99}.

The resulting H$\alpha$ fluxes in erg~s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ Hz$^{-1}$ are then multiplied by the  narrow-band filter width (transformed to Hz) and by the surface of the sphere over which this energy is emitted, i.e. a sphere with the cluster's luminosity distance as radius. We assume that all galaxies are located at the same distance. This then gives the H$\alpha$ luminosities in erg~s$^{-1}$. The errors are based on the zeropoint errors and the measurement errors in counts given by {\tt SExtractor} which are then propagated in the same way as the measurements. We do not take into account any errors in the filter width or the cluster distance.

To convert ergs~s$^{-1}$ to M$_\odot$~yr$^{-1}$ we use the conversion factor of \citet{Kennicutt94}:
\begin{equation}
1~\textrm{ergs }\,\textrm{s}^{-1}\, = 7.9 \times 10^{-42}~\Msun \,\textrm{yr}^{-1}
\end{equation}
The transformation is known to vary by a factor of $\sim2.5$, introducing an error of $\sim30\%$, which was added to the measurement errors to obtain the final error of the SFRs.  Based on the magnitude limits described above in Section~\ref{sec:detection}, we find a $5~\sigma$ limiting H$\alpha$ luminosity of $L_{H\alpha} = 1\times10^{41}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ which corresponds to a $5~\sigma$ SFR$~=1.1~$M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$.

\subsection{SFRs measured with different apertures}\label{sec:aper_compare}

When extracting fluxes with {\tt SExtractor}, we test the two different output parameters: {\tt FLUX\_AUTO} and {\tt FLUX\_APER}.  {\tt FLUX\_APER} is the flux measured in a fixed circular aperture of 20 pixels diameter, corresponding to $2.3^{\prime\prime}$ or $\sim$20 kpc at the cluster distance. {\tt FLUX\_AUTO} uses a Kron-like elliptical aperture whose size depends on the objects light distribution. {\tt FLUX\_AUTO} is supposedly more robust \citep{Bertin1996} than {\tt FLUX\_APER} in crowded regions (e.g. the cluster centre).

The comparison between SFRs measured within the fixed aperture (based on {\tt FLUX\_APER}) and the variable Kron-like aperture (based on {\tt FLUX\_AUTO}) shows that they agree well within the errors. There is only one outliers, which is a confirmed member located very close to the brightest star in the image. This galaxy has a SFR $\sim$ 3.5 ~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ based on the aperture flux, but has a much lower SFR ($\sim$ -2~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$) based on {\tt FLUX\_AUTO}. This is probably due to the deblending algorithm of {\tt SExtractor} affecting the detection area that is assigned to galaxies with close neighbours (in this case a bright star). Measuring the flux within a fixed aperture is more robust in these cases, which is reflected in the large measurement error of the {\tt FLUX\_AUTO}-SFR of $\pm$2.2~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$, compared to $\pm$0.7~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ for the {\tt FLUX\_APER}-SFR.
For the whole sample the SFRs measured within a fixed aperture by {\tt FLUX\_APER} show on average slightly lower errors than the SFRs measured with a Kron-like aperture and we therefore adopt the fixed aperture SFRs in the following.

\subsection{Cluster Membership}\label{sec:contaminants}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{figure3}
\caption{Colour-magnitude diagram for all 82 sources detected in the narrow-band image.  The dashed lines indicate lines of constant significance $\Sigma$, which show the excess flux in the narrow-band image above the noise in the broad-band image.  Spectroscopically confirmed cluster member galaxies are plotted as large red points while all other detected objects are shown as blue crosses.  The vertical line shows the 95\% completeness level, so only candidates brighter than this limit are considered as possible excess emission-line objects.  Candidate emission-line cluster galaxies are objects with $EW > 20 \mathrm{\AA}$ and $\Sigma > 3$ (open magenta circles).  \label{fig:ha_excess}}
\end{figure}

We detect 82 resolved objects at the 2$\sigma$ level in the narrow-band and broad-band images.  Of these, 10 are confirmed cluster members with spectroscopic redshifts.  H$\alpha$ emitters at the redshift of the cluster can be identified among the remaining 72 candidate cluster members by having excess flux in the narrow-band relative to the broad-band observations.

Figure~\ref{fig:ha_excess} shows the excess flux in the narrow-band filter as a function of magnitude for all 82 detected objects.  We require the narrow-band flux to be a factor of three $\Sigma$ greater than the noise in the broad-band (continuum) image \citep{Bunker1995} for an object to be considered an excess line-emitter.  The dotted curves in Figure~\ref{fig:ha_excess} show lines of constant $\Sigma$.  Emission-line candidates with low equivalent widths ($EW$) are likely to be foreground interlopers \citep{Palunas2004}, so we also apply a minimum $EW$ for the H$\alpha$ line of 20$\mathrm{\AA}$ \citep{Hayes2010}.  Candidate emission-line cluster galaxies are objects with $EW > 20 \mathrm{\AA}$ and excess line-emission of $\Sigma > 3$, identified as open magenta circles in Figure~\ref{fig:ha_excess}.

Of all the detected objects, 16 satisfy the criteria to be considered excess line-emitters and are therefore more likely to be members of the cluster.  The red points in Figure~\ref{fig:ha_excess} show spectroscopically confirmed cluster members, which are all on the bright end ($H_{narrow}<22$) of the distribution of narrow-band magnitudes of detected objects.  Even though these objects are spectroscopically confirmed as cluster members, only three of the 10 satisfy the criteria for being excess H$\alpha$ line-emitters associated with the cluster.  This shows that while this method is a good test to show the most likely cluster candidate members based on excess line emission when no spectroscopic confirmation is available, if a galaxy in the cluster does not have excess line emission (ie. it is not star-forming), it will not be identified as a member of the cluster by this technique.  \citet{Lidman2008} argue that galaxies in the XMMU2235 cluster centre are very likely cluster members based on the infrared colour-magnitude relation of the cluster and the low  likelihood of finding foreground or background galaxies in the narrow colour interval.

What objects could act as possible interlopers?  Galaxies bright in $H\alpha$ could be background galaxies with [OII] emission at $z=3.21$, but this is unlikely due to their generally faint $H$ narrow-band magnitudes.  Galaxies that are much fainter in the narrow-band than expected from their  broad-band magnitude are interpreted to have H$\alpha$ in absorption and therefore show negative SFRs.  The absorption could be caused by stellar absorption of the Balmer line, or a strong non-H$\alpha$ absorption feature in foreground galaxies.  Galaxies at $z\sim0.85$ would have calcium triplet absorption lines at  $\lambda$$\lambda$$\lambda$8498,8542,8662$\mathrm{\AA}$ that would fall into the $\lambda 1.57 \mu$m  narrow-band filter.  Of 15 galaxies that show negative SFRs, the 4 strongest are confirmed cluster members (the 4 bright galaxies in the cluster centre).

Throughout the rest of the paper, we continue to identify confirmed cluster members in red, the candidate members satisfying the excess line-emission criteria in blue, and the remaining object detections in grey.

\section{Results}\label{sec:results}

In the following section we present the calculated star formation rates (SFRs) and how they correlate with properties of the galaxies (magnitude) and the environment (distance from the cluster centre, as defined by the BCG).  Table~\ref{tab1} gives the results for all 82 objects we consider in this study with spectroscopically confirmed cluster members listed as the first 10 items.  The last column gives information about cluster membership and how detected objects are classified (see Section~\ref{sec:detection}):  Excess line-emitters as defined in Section~\ref{sec:contaminants} have a flag corresponding to their $\Sigma$-level (2 or 3), while galaxies below that have a flag $=1$.

For the full sample of 82 galaxies, we find an average SFR of 1.0~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ with a scatter of 1.6.   For the spectroscopically confirmed cluster members, we measure an average SFR of 1.0$~\pm~2.6~$M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$.  Among just the excess line-emission galaxies we find an average SFR of 3.6$~\pm~1.3$~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$.

\subsection{SFR as a function of $H$ broad-band magnitude}\label{sec:sfr-mag}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.485\textwidth]{figure4}
\caption{Star formation rates as a function of $H$ broad-band magnitude. Spectroscopically confirmed member galaxies are plotted as large red circles; excess line-emission candidate member galaxies are large blue crosses and/or open magenta circles; all other detections are small grey crosses. The red dashed-dotted line represents a least squares fit to the data points of confirmed members. The $5\sigma$ SFR detection limit is shown as the dashed horizontal line, as described in Section~\ref{sec:calibration}. Galaxies within a 200 kpc radius of the BCG are marked with open orange triangles. \label{fig:sfr-hmag}}
\end{figure}

We now present the correlation between SFR and an intrinsic galaxy property, galaxy magnitude. The central wavelength of the observed $H$ broad-band corresponds to a restframe wavelength of $\sim$6900$\mathrm{\AA}$, slightly redder than restframe $R$ band.  Figure~\ref{fig:sfr-hmag} shows the SFRs as a function of $H$ broad-band magnitude.  We find a dependence of SFR on galaxy $H$ broad-band magnitude such that brighter galaxies have lower SFRs.  This correlation is strong for the confirmed members (red) but less evident for excess line-emission galaxies (blue).  A linear fit to the 10 data points of the confirmed members is shown as red dashed-dotted line in Figure~\ref{fig:sfr-hmag}.

We calculate Spearman's rank correlation coefficients and Kendall's $\tau$ separately for confirmed and excess line-emission galaxies. The correlation coefficient, $\rho$, can have values between $-1 \leq \rho \leq 1$, where $\rho =1$ ($\rho =-1$) means that the two data sets are correlated (anti-correlated) by a monotonic function and $\rho =  0$ indicates that the two data sets are completely uncorrelated. The significance of $\rho$ can be calculated from $\rho$ and the sample size $N$. We give the significance in terms of the percentage likelihood that there is no correlation between the two variables.  Since $\rho$ is less suited for small sample sizes we also compute Kendall's $\tau$ coefficient to support the results on statistical significance for the small subsample of confirmed members ($N=10$). Kendall's $\tau$ is analogous to $\rho$, however, it computes a probability rather than estimating the amount of variation in the data that can be accounted for by a monotonic function. Kendall's $\tau$ is the difference between the two probabilities that the data are observed in the same or in a different order, giving an estimate of the likelihood of a correlation between the variables, or more accurately the lack thereof.

We find that confirmed members have a correlation coefficient of $\rho_{mem} = 0.90$ with a probability of $P_{mem} = 5\%$ that the two variables are uncorrelated. Kendall's $\tau$ evaluates the correlation at a slightly higher confidence with $\tau=0.69$ and a corresponding probability for the lack of a correlation of $P_{mem}=0.7\%$.  The candidate members do not show any significant correlation between SFR and magnitude. We compute $\rho_{cand} = 0.04$ with a probability $P_{cand} = 44\%$ and $\tau=-0.06$ with a probability of $P_{cand} = 43\%$.  The same is true for excess line-emitters, which show no correlation between SFR and $H$ broad-band magnitude ($P_{excess} = 42\%$).  We conclude that for spectroscopically confirmed cluster members there is a positive correlation between SFR and magnitude, i.e. the SFR increases for fainter galaxies in the cluster.

It is possible that a selection effect exists which causes faint galaxies to be less likely to get a successful redshift determination.  Redshifts from \citet{Rosati2009} were determined from a combination of cross-correlations with a range of template spectra and identification of the [OII]$\lambda3727\mathrm{\AA}$ emission line, although they claim most redshifts were derived solely from the [OII] emission line.  Among galaxies with the same $H$-band magnitude, the galaxy spectra with strong emission lines are more likely to result in successful redshift determinations than the spectra with only weak or no emission.  These galaxies are most likely to be those identified as excess line-emission galaxies shown in blue in Figure~\ref{fig:sfr-hmag}.

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.485\textwidth]{figure5}
\caption{Star formation rates as a function of distance from the cluster centre. Symbols are the same as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sfr-hmag}. The vertical dashed line marks the projected distance within which no star formation occurs ($R_{QUENCH}$). Galaxies within this limit are also marked with orange triangles in Figure~\ref{fig:sfr-hmag}. \label{fig:sfr-dist}}
\end{figure}

\subsection{SFR as a function of distance from the cluster centre}\label{sec:sfr-dist}

In the following we show the correlation between the SFRs and the distance from the brightest cluster galaxy (BCG: see Figure~\ref{fig:images}). \citet{Rosati2009} show that the position of the BCG coincides within 2$^{\prime\prime}$ of the peak of the cluster's extended X-ray emission. It is therefore justified to assume that the BCG resides in the centre of the cluster's potential well and can be regarded as the cluster centre.

Figure~\ref{fig:sfr-dist} shows the radial distribution of SFRs within the cluster.  While the measured SFRs do not cover a large range in values, we find that SFR increases with distance from the cluster centre.  In fact, there are no star-forming galaxies among the confirmed cluster members and excess line-emission galaxies within a radius of $r\sim 200$ kpc of the BCG.  The five confirmed members within a 200 kpc radius have no excess H$\alpha$ emission.  The confirmed members outside a 200 kpc radius have SFRs of about 1.5~$M_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ or above.  The same is true for all excess line-emission member candidates: there are no star forming candidate cluster members within $r \sim 200$ kpc.  All galaxies with SFR $>$ 3~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ are located at radii larger than $\sim 250$ kpc.

The SFR-distance relation is significant for member candidates. The Spearman's rank correlation coefficients for members and candidates respectively are $\rho_{mem} = 0.73$ at $P_{mem} = 15\%$ and $\rho_{cand} = 0.42$ at $P_{cand} = 5\%$. Kendall's $\tau$ coefficient gives a likelihood that SFR and distance are uncorrelated of $P_{mem} = 5\%$ and $P_{cand} = 0.1\%$ for members and candidates, respectively.  If we only consider excess line-emitting galaxies we derive a probability of $P_{excess} = 48\%$, concluding that SFR and cluster-centric distance are uncorrelated for the excess line-emitters.
Furthermore, the faint galaxies that are located in the projected cluster centre are too quiescent for their $H$ band magnitude, as suggested from the SFR-magnitude relation presented in Section~\ref{sec:sfr-mag}. Galaxies within a radius of 200 kpc from the BCG are marked with orange triangles in Figure~\ref{fig:sfr-hmag}. The five galaxies that show the largest offset from the relation shown for confirmed cluster members (red dashed-dotted line) are located at the smallest projected distance from the BCG. We suggest that the star formation in those faint galaxies is quenched by processes occurring in the cluster centre.

Instead of a continuous decrease in star formation we see evidence for a quenching radius $R_{QUENCH}$, within which the star formation is sharply shut off among galaxies confidently associated with the cluster. If galaxies within $R_{QUENCH}\sim 200$ kpc are not considered, the correlation between SFR and cluster-centric distance largely disappears. To distinguish between the two hypotheses of (1) the existence of a quenching radius, as opposed to (2) continuously decreasing SFRs as field galaxies are accreted onto the cluster, $H\alpha$ imaging of a larger field of view out to larger cluster-centric distances is necessary.  This work represents one of the first studies of a $z>1$ galaxy cluster with solid measurements of SFRs of individual galaxies from which we can see the evidence for a SFR-distance relation and possible quenching radius.

\section{Discussion}\label{sec:discussion}

Recent studies of galaxy clusters at intermediate redshift and $z>1$ indicate varying results regarding star-forming trends among galaxies, although most studies show evidence for increasing SFRs with distance from the cluster centre.  We now look more in depth at previous studies.

\citet{Finn05} study three intermediate redshift clusters from the ESO Distant Cluster Survey (EDisCS) in the redshift range $0.65 < z < 0.95$ and compare their median SFRs to field galaxies in the same redshift range. They find that the median SFR of cluster members is between 2 and 3.5 M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$, which is significantly lower than the median SFR of field galaxies of about 6 M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$,  showing that star formation in clusters is suppressed at intermediate redshifts.  We measure a median SFR for XMMU2235 of 1.0~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ with a scatter of 1.2 for all 82 galaxies, consistent with the SFRs of EDisCS clusters but nearly a factor of 10 lower than the typical field galaxy SFR value of 10 M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ for this redshift range \cite[e.g.,][]{Bauer05,noeske07,Damen09,Bauer2010}.

Interestingly, our results show that star formation in the central region of a dense cluster at $z=1.4$ is suppressed relative to the field, and there is evidence for the suppression of star formation to not be as strong inside a structure at $z=1.6$ that appears to be a galaxy cluster in formation.  \citet{Kurk2009} identify an over-density at $z=1.6$ called Cl 0332-2742 in the GMASS survey.  Using Spitzer/MIPS observations, they find that SFRs of galaxies within the over-density are only three to five times lower than SFRs of field galaxies at similar redshifts, as opposed to the factor of 10 decrease we find in the XMMU2235 cluster.  The Cl 0332-2742 over-density is most likely not yet virialised, which could explain why galaxies in this structure still show significant levels of star formation.

Two of the three clusters studied by \citet{Finn05} also show a decrease in H$\alpha$ fraction towards cluster centre.  In contrast to this result, a narrow-band H$\alpha$ study by \citet{Koyama09} of the RXJ1716.4+6708 cluster at $z=0.81$, finds no H$\alpha$ emitters within a radius of 250 kpc of the cluster core.  \citet{Hayashi10} identify 44 [OII] emitters in the central region of the XMMXCS J2215.9-1738 cluster at $z=1.46$ and calculate SFRs down to 2.6~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$.  They find no evidence for decreasing SFRs towards the cluster core.

Our findings agree with a recent study of SFRs in the cluster RX J0152.7-1357 at $z=0.834$ by \citet{Patel2009}.  They stack Spitzer/MIPS imaging at 24 $\mu$m to determine SFRs and find a decrease in SFR with increasing local density within a similar density regime to our cluster.  Both this study and that of \citet{Patel2009} contrast to recent studies of field galaxies at $z\sim1$ by \citet{Elbaz07} and \citet{Cooper08} who suggest that at $z\sim1$, galaxies in higher density environments exhibit higher SFRs than galaxies at lower densities.  The discrepancy is likely due to differing definitions of environment and local density \citep[see discussion in][]{Patel2009}.  \citet{Cooper08} examine galaxies in the DEEP2 survey, while \citet{Elbaz07} study the GOODS fields, neither of which contains galaxy clusters.  The decrease of SFR we find at the highest densities, meaning the cluster centre, is not a density region probed by the studies of \citet{Elbaz07} or \citet{Cooper08} which might be the reason that they do  not observe the suppressed SF at high densities which we see in XMMU2335.

Other studies of the XMMU2235 cluster include \citet{Lidman2008}, \citet{Rosati2009}, and very recently, \citet{Strazzullo2010}.  \citet{Lidman2008} use simple stellar population models to determine that galaxies in the core of XMMU2235 are already old, with typical ages of 3 Gyr.  \citet{Rosati2009} detect no [OII] emitters within 250 kpc of the cluster centre, while \citet{Strazzullo2010} use rest-frame ultraviolet properties of spectroscopically confirmed members to show that individual galaxies within a clustercentric distance of 250 kpc are effectively quenched of star formation.  These results are consistent with our findings of no new star formation in the core, including evidence for the presence of H$\alpha$ absorption in the four confirmed cluster members located within a radius of $\sim 100$~kpc, and a larger scatter in SFR values with increasing distance from the central cD galaxy.   We confirm evidence for the build-up of the red sequence starting in the cluster core and moving outwards.  Furthermore we find that there is a radius, $R_{QUENCH}$ of about 200 kpc, within which star formation is efficiently quenched.

Environmental effects that shut down star formation in cluster galaxies are generally assumed to begin when accreting satellite galaxies have reached the virial radius of a host halo.  However, some studies have shown that SFRs can remain depressed relative to the field out to two or three times the virial radius of the cluster \citep{Balough2000,Verdugo2008}.  The virial radius of  XMMU2235 is estimated to be around 1 Mpc \citep{Rosati2009,Jee2009}, which is well beyond the radius we associate with complete star formation quenching, $R_{QUENCH}$, and much larger than our observations extend.  Note that the $R_{QUENCH}$ we define can be thought of as a lower limit due to projection effects.  It is possible that SFRs outside of $R_{QUENCH}$ remain around the low values we measure until the virial radius of the cluster, or farther, and then increase to match the value of field galaxies at that redshift.

We interpret the possible existence of $R_{QUENCH}$ as evidence for suppressed star formation due to cluster specific processes at the very central region of the cluster.  Gas could be removed from galaxies through ram pressure stripping as they enter the cluster environment and pass through the dense intergalactic medium in the cluster centre \citep[e.g.][]{gunn-gott1972,Bekki2009,Tonnesen2010}.  A galaxy could also lose its halo gas reservoir according to hierarchical formation models, in a process called ``strangulation'' \citep{Larson1980}.  Such processes have recently been modelled by \citet{Book2010}, but they were unable to determine the exact causes of gas-stripping in cluster environments due to the ``complex interplay of preprocessing effects at work.''   Another process causing the suppression of star formation is galaxy harassment, repeated high velocity encounters and interactions, which require both high relative velocities and high galaxy number densities; conditions that are present in the centre of massive galaxy clusters like XMMU2235.   In fact, the velocity dispersion of XMMU2235 is  $\sim800$~km/s \citep{Rosati2009} which means the crossing time at $R_{QUENCH}$ is quite short, at roughly $0.25$~Gyr.

In this study we probe relatively small cluster-centric radii and (maybe consequently) measure a relatively narrow range of SFRs up to $\sim$ 6 M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$. To investigate if the SFRs in the cluster outskirts reach the typical field value at this redshift of 10 M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ or if they are undergoing a short initial increase in SFR before quenching sets in, observations of individual galaxies  across a larger distance from the cluster centre are needed.

\section{Summary and conclusions}\label{sec:summ}

We examine star formation rates (SFRs) in the high redshift, massive galaxy cluster XMMU2235 at $z=1.39$ \citep{Mullis05}.  To calculate SFRs we use deep $H$ narrow-band imaging from NIRI at Gemini North, which corresponds to the wavelength of the H$\alpha$ emission line at the redshift of the cluster.  XMMU2235 is the most massive galaxy cluster above $z\sim1$ known to date \citep{Rosati2009} and has a population of red, supposedly passive galaxies forming a relatively tight red sequence \citep{Lidman2008}. Our observed field is 1.6$\times$1.6 arcminutes which corresponds to roughly 500$\times$500 kpc.  In the following we summarize our most important findings:

\begin{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\theenumi}{\arabic{enumi}.}

\item  We directly measure the excess H$\alpha$ line emission of 82 individual objects inside the observed field of the massive galaxy cluster, XMMU J2235.3-2557 at $z=1.39$.  Of the 82 galaxies, 10 galaxies are spectroscopically confirmed cluster members. A total of 16 out of the 82 galaxies are identified as excess line-emission galaxies and therefore the most likely to be candidate cluster members.  We estimate SFRs for all detected objects from the the narrow-band imaging of H$\alpha$ at $z=1.39$.  \\

\item We find a small range in SFRs from zero to 6 M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ within the surveyed area of $\sim500$ kpc radius.   Including all observed galaxies, we measure a median SFR of 1.0~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ with a scatter of 1.6, consistent with the SFRs found for intermediate redshift clusters (e.g. EDisCS clusters at $0.4<z<0.8$) and a factor of $\sim$10 lower than field galaxies at $1<z<2$.  Among just the excess line-emission galaxies we find an average SFR of 3.6$~\pm~1.3$~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$.  The highest SFRs in the cluster are $\sim$~6~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$, still lower than the median SFR of field galaxies at this redshift.\\

\item  SFRs increase with distance from the brightest cluster galaxy.  All excess line-emitting galaxies are located outside a radius of $\sim200$ kpc from the brightest cluster galaxy.  All galaxies with SFR~$>$~3~M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ are located outside a radius of $\sim250$~kpc from the cluster centre.  We argue that the star formation might not only be continuously suppressed as galaxies approach the cluster centre, but that there is a quenching radius ($R_{QUENCH}~\sim~200$~kpc) within which star formation is rapidly shut-off.
\\

\item  The lack of star formation within $R_{QUENCH}$ indicates that star formation is suppressed in this massive galaxies cluster at $z=1.39$.  The suppression of star formation could be caused either by interaction with the ICM (ram pressure stripping) or frequent high velocity encounters (harassment) caused by the high galaxy density in the cluster centre where the crossing time at $R_{QUENCH}$ is 0.25 Gyr.

\end{enumerate}

We conclude that star formation in this cluster is effectively shut off in the cluster centre already at $z=1.39$, when the universe was only $\sim$4.5 Gyr old. Galaxies at larger radii from the cluster centre are moderately forming stars, but not reaching the average SFR of field galaxies at this redshift. This suggests that the red sequence is built up from the inside out, starting at redshifts $z > 2$ in the most massive galaxy clusters, in corroboration with previous studies of XMMU2235.  It would be very interesting to test this scenario by proving the SFR-distance relation and average SFRs out to larger cluster-centric distances.

\section*{Acknowledgments}

Based on observations obtained at the Gemini Observatory, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under a cooperative agreement with the NSF on behalf of the Gemini partnership: the National Science Foundation (United States), the Science and Technology Facilities Council (United Kingdom), the National Research Council (Canada), CONICYT (Chile), the Australian Research Council (Australia), Minist\'erio da Ci\^encia e Tecnologia (Brazil) and Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnolog\'ia e Innovaci\'on Productiva (Argentina).  The data presented in this paper originate from the Gemini program GN-2007B-Q-79, observed in queue mode.  J.V. acknowledges the School of Physics and Astronomy (University of
Nottingham) for granting access to its facilities, as well as all
the members of the School for sharing with him a wonderful working and
personal environment.

\bibliographystyle{mn2e}


\section{Introduction}
 With the availability of radioactive ion beam (RIB) facilities at Cooler Storage Ring (CSR)
(China) \cite{rib1}, the GSI Facility for Antiproton and Ion beam
Research (FAIR) \cite{rib2}, RIB facility at Rikagaku Kenyusho
(RIKEN) in Japan \cite{rib3}, GANIL in France \cite{rib4}, and the
upcoming facility for RIB at Michigan State University \cite{rib5}
one has a possibility to study the properties of nuclear
matter under the extreme conditions of isospin asymmetry. Heavy-ion
collisions induced by the neutron rich matter provide a unique
opportunity to explore the isospin dependence of in-medium nuclear
interactions, since isospin degree of freedom plays an important
role in heavy-ion collisions through both the nuclear matter equation of
state (EOS) as well as via in-medium nucleon-nucleon (nn) cross section.
\par
 After about three decades of intensive efforts in both
nuclear experiments and theoretical calculations, equation of state for isospin
symmetric matter is now relatively well understood \cite{lirpt}. The effect of isospin degree of
freedom on the collective transverse in-plane flow as well as on its disappearance \cite{krof89} (there exists a particular
incident energy called \emph{balance energy} (E$_{bal}$) or \emph{energy of vanishing flow} (EVF) at which transverse in-plane flow
disappears) has been reported in the literature \cite{li96,pak97,daff98}, where it was found
 that neutron-rich systems have higher  E$_{bal}$ compared to neutron-deficient
  systems at all colliding geometries varying from central to peripheral
ones. The effect of isospin degree of freedom on  E$_{bal}$ was found to be much more pronounced at peripheral colliding geometries
 compared to central ones. As reported in the literature, the isospin
dependence of collective flow as well as its disappearance has been explained as
a competition among various reaction mechanisms, such as
nucleon-nucleon collisions, symmetry energy, surface property of
the colliding nuclei, and Coulomb force. The relative importance
among these mechanisms is not yet clear \cite{li96}. In recent study, we \cite{gaum10}
confronted theoretical calculations (using isospin-dependent quantum molecular
dynamics (IQMD) model \cite{hart98}) with the data at all colliding geometries and
were able to reproduce the data within 5\% on average at all colliding geometries. Motivated by the good agreement
of the calculations with data, two of us \cite{gaum210} (in order to explore the relative
importance among above mentioned reaction mechanisms in isospin effects on the
 E$_{bal}$) calculated the  E$_{bal}$ throughout the mass range for two sets
 of isotopic systems with N/Z =1.16 and 1.33. The isotopic pairs were
 chosen so that the effect of the Coulomb repulsion is the same for a given pair.
 The choice of the above N/Z was taken because the percentage difference $\Delta$ N/Z$ (\%)$ = $\frac{(N/Z)^{1.33}-(N/Z)^{1.16}}{(N/Z)^{1.16}}$$\times100$
  between the given pair is about 15\% which is same as in Ref. \cite{pak97,gaum10}. Based on the results
  of  E$_{bal}$ for isotopic pairs we concluded in Ref. \cite{gaum210} that mass dependence effects seem to
  dominate the isospin effects (consisting of isospin-dependent cross section, symmetry energy, surface
  properties). In our recent results \cite{sood10} we find that collective
  flow for isotopic pairs with large difference between N/Z is sensitive to the symmetry energy. Coulomb repulsion will be same for isotopic pair throughout the mass range.
   The comparison
  of  E$_{bal}$ for isotopic pairs gave us the hint that the Coulomb repulsion could
  be dominant in isospin effects in collective flow as well as its disappearance \cite{li96,pak97,gaum10}.
  Therefore Gautam and Sood \cite{gaum210} studied the isospin effects on the E$_{bal}$ throughout the
mass range 48-350 for two sets of isobaric systems with N/Z = 1.0 and 1.4 at semi central colliding geometry. These results
showed that the difference between the E$_{bal}$ for two isobaric
 systems is mainly due to the Coulomb repulsion. It was also shown that
  Coulomb repulsion dominates over symmetry energy.
These findings also indicated towards the dominance of the Coulomb
 repulsion in larger magnitude of isospin effects in
 E$_{bal}$ at peripheral collisions. Here we aim to extend the study over
  full range of colliding geometry varying from central to
 peripheral ones. Section 2
describes the model in brief. Section 3 explains the results and
discussion and Sec. 4 summarizes the results.
\section{The model}
 The present study is carried out within the framework of
IQMD model \cite{hart98}. The IQMD model treats
different charge states of nucleons, deltas, and pions explicitly,
as inherited from the Vlasov-Uehling-Uhlenbeck (VUU) model. The IQMD model has been used successfully for the
analysis of a large number of observables from low to relativistic
energies. The isospin degree of freedom enters into the
calculations via symmetry potential, cross sections, and Coulomb
interaction.
 \par
 In this model, baryons are represented by Gaussian-shaped density distributions
\begin{equation}
f_{i}(\vec{r},\vec{p},t) =
\frac{1}{\pi^{2}\hbar^{2}}\exp(-[\vec{r}-\vec{r_{i}}(t)]^{2}\frac{1}{2L})
\times \exp(-[\vec{p}- \vec{p_{i}}(t)]^{2}\frac{2L}{\hbar^{2}})
 \end{equation}
 Nucleons are initialized in a sphere with radius R = 1.12 A$^{1/3}$ fm, in accordance with liquid-drop model.
 Each nucleon occupies a volume of \emph{h$^{3}$}, so that phase space is uniformly filled.
 The initial momenta are randomly chosen between 0 and Fermi momentum ($\vec{p}$$_{F}$).
 The nucleons of the target and projectile interact by two- and three-body Skyrme forces, Yukawa potential, Coulomb interactions,
  and momentum-dependent interactions. In addition to the use of explicit charge states of all baryons and mesons, a symmetry potential between protons and neutrons
 corresponding to the Bethe-Weizsacker mass formula has been included. The hadrons propagate using Hamilton equations of motion:
\begin {eqnarray}
\frac{d\vec{{r_{i}}}}{dt} = \frac{d\langle H
\rangle}{d\vec{p_{i}}};& & \frac{d\vec{p_{i}}}{dt} = -
\frac{d\langle H \rangle}{d\vec{r_{i}}}
\end {eqnarray}
 with
\begin {eqnarray}
\langle H\rangle& =&\langle T\rangle+\langle V \rangle
\nonumber\\
& =& \sum_{i}\frac{p^{2}_{i}}{2m_{i}} + \sum_{i}\sum_{j>i}\int
f_{i}(\vec{r},\vec{p},t)V^{ij}(\vec{r}~',\vec{r})
 \nonumber\\
& & \times f_{j}(\vec{r}~',\vec{p}~',t) d\vec{r}~ d\vec{r}~'~
d\vec{p}~ d\vec{p}~'.
\end {eqnarray}
 The baryon potential\emph{ V$^{ij}$}, in the above relation, reads as
 \begin {eqnarray}
  \nonumber V^{ij}(\vec{r}~'-\vec{r})& =&V^{ij}_{Skyrme} + V^{ij}_{Yukawa} +
  V^{ij}_{Coul} + V^{ij}_{mdi} + V^{ij}_{sym}
    \nonumber\\
   & =& [t_{1}\delta(\vec{r}~'-\vec{r})+t_{2}\delta(\vec{r}~'-\vec{r})\rho^{\gamma-1}(\frac{\vec{r}~'+\vec{r}}{2})]
   \nonumber\\
   &  & +t_{3}\frac{\exp(|(\vec{r}~'-\vec{r})|/\mu)}{(|(\vec{r}~'-\vec{r})|/\mu)}+
    \frac{Z_{i}Z_{j}e^{2}}{|(\vec{r}~'-\vec{r})|}
   \nonumber \\
   &  & +t_{4}\ln^{2}[t_{5}(\vec{p}~'-\vec{p})^{2} +
    1]\delta(\vec{r}~'-\vec{r})
    \nonumber\\
   &  & +t_{6}\frac{1}{\varrho_{0}}T_{3i}T_{3j}\delta(\vec{r_{i}}~'-\vec{r_{j}}).
 \end {eqnarray}
Here \emph{Z$_{i}$} and \emph{Z$_{j}$} denote the charges of
\emph{ith} and \emph{jth} baryon, and \emph{T$_{3i}$} and
\emph{T$_{3j}$} are their respective \emph{T$_{3}$} components
(i.e., $1/2$ for protons and $-1/2$ for neutrons). The
parameters\emph{ $\mu$} and \emph{t$_{1}$,....,t$_{6}$} are
adjusted to the real part of the nucleonic optical potential.
 For the density dependence of  the nucleon optical potential, standard Skyrme type parametrization is employed.
 The momentum-dependence \emph{V$_{mdi}^{ij}$} of the nn interactions, which may optionally be used in IQMD, is fitted to the experimental data
 in the real part of the nucleon optical potential.
  It is worth mentioning
that the Gaussian width which describes the interaction range
of the particle depends on the mass of the system
in IQMD, since each nucleus shows maximum stability for a particular width as shown in Ref. \cite{hart98,gaum10} .
For eg, width of Ca is 4.16 fm$^{2}$ and for Au is 8.33 fm$^{2}$ and Gaussian width varies
between this mass range.

 \section{Results and discussion}
  For the present study, we simulate several thousands events of each
  reaction at incident energies around E$_{bal}$ in small steps of 10 MeV/nucleon.
   In particular, we simulate the reactions
$^{24}$Mg+$^{24}$Mg, $^{58}$Cu+$^{58}$Cu, $^{72}$Kr+$^{72}$Kr, $^{96}$Cd+$^{96}$Cd,
$^{120}$Nd+$^{120}$Nd, $^{135}$Ho+$^{135}$Ho, having N/Z = 1.0 and
reactions $^{24}$Ne+$^{24}$Ne, $^{58}$Cr+$^{58}$Cr, $^{72}$Zn+$^{72}$Zn,
$^{96}$Zr+$^{96}$Zr, $^{120}$Sn+$^{120}$Sn, and
$^{135}$Ba+$^{135}$Ba, having N/Z = 1.4, respectively,
 in the whole range of colliding geometry. The
colliding geometry is divided into four impact parameter bins of
0.15 $<$ $\hat{b}$ $<$ 0.25 (BIN 1),
 0.35 $<$ $\hat{b}$ $< $0.45 (BIN 2), 0.55 $<$ $\hat{b}$ $<$ 0.65 (BIN 3),
and 0.75 $<$ $\hat{b}$ $<$ 0.85 (BIN 4), where $\hat{b}$ =
b/b$_{max}$. Here N/Z is changed by keeping the mass fixed. We use
anisotropic standard isospin- and energy-dependent nn cross
section $\sigma$ = 0.8 $\sigma$$_{NN}$$^{free}$. The details about
the elastic and inelastic cross sections for proton-proton and
proton-neutron collisions can be found in Ref. \cite{hart98}.
The cross sections for neutron-neutron collisions are assumed to
be equal to the proton-proton cross sections.
\par
We also use soft equation of state along with momentum-dependent
intercations (MDI). The results with the above choice of equation of state and
cross section were in good agreement with the data
\cite{gaum10,gaum210}. The reactions are followed until the
transverse flow saturates. The saturation time varies form 100
fm/c for lighter masses to 300 fm/c for heavier masses. For transverse flow, we use the
quantity "\textit{directed transverse momentum $\langle p_{x}^{dir}\rangle$}" which is
defined as \cite{sood04,leh96}
\begin {equation}
\langle{p_{x}^{dir}}\rangle = \frac{1} {A}\sum_{i=1}^{A}{sign\{
{y(i)}\} p_{x}(i)},
\end {equation}
where $y(i)$ is the rapidity and $p_{x}$(i) is the momentum of
$i^{th}$ particle. The rapidity is defined as
\begin {equation}
Y(i)= \frac{1}{2}\ln\frac{{\textbf{{E}}}(i)+{{\textbf{p}}}_{z}(i)}
{{{\textbf{E}}}(i)-{{\textbf{p}}}_{z}(i)},
\end {equation}
where ${\textbf{E}}(i)$ and ${\textbf{p}_{z}}(i)$ are,
respectively, the energy and longitudinal momentum of $i^{th}$
particle. In this definition, all the rapidity bins are taken into
account. A straight line interpolation is used to calculate E$_{bal}$.
\begin{table}
\caption{The values of $\tau_{1}$ and $\tau_{1.4}$ for BIN 1 to BIN 4 for calculations with Coulomb potential
with and without A=48.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline

&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{$\tau_{1}$}&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{$\tau_{1.4}$}\\\cline{2-5}
b/b$_{max}$&  With A=48 &Without A=48  &With A=48  &Without A=48 \\\cline{1-5}
        BIN 1    &-0.36$\pm$ 0.01  &-0.38$\pm$ 0.03  &-0.33$\pm$ 0.01  &-0.31$\pm$ 0.02 \\\cline{1-5}
 \hline BIN 2    &-0.50$\pm$ 0.01  &-0.54$\pm$ 0.03  &-0.45$\pm$ 0.01  &-0.48$\pm$ 0.01 \\\cline{1-5}
 \hline BIN 3    &-0.70$\pm$ 0.03  &-0.83$\pm$ 0.07  &-0.56$\pm$ 0.02  &-0.57$\pm$ 0.07 \\\cline{1-5}
 \hline BIN 4    &-0.93$\pm$ 0.08  &-1.14$\pm$ 0.25  &-0.70$\pm$ 0.01  &-0.70$\pm$ 0.03 \\\cline{1-5}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}

\begin{figure}[!t] \centering
\vskip 0.5cm
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=13cm]{fig1.eps}
\vskip 0.5cm \caption{(Color online) Left (right) panels
displays E$_{bal}$ as a function of
combined mass of system for different impact parameter bins with (without) A = 48. Solid
(open) symbols are for systems having N/Z = 1.0 (1.4). Circles (diamonds) are for calculations with full (reduced) Coulomb.
 Lines are power law fit $\varpropto
A^{\tau}$. $\tau$ values without errors for full Coulomb calculations are displayed in figure. The detailed values of $\tau$ are given in the table 1 and 2.}\label{fig1}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[!t] \centering
\vskip 0.5cm
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=10cm]{fig2.eps}
\vskip 0.5cm \caption{(Color online) Upper (lower) panels display $\tau$ as a function of reduced impact
parameter for full (reduced) Coulomb. Values are plotted at upper limit of each bin. Symbols are explained in text. Lines are
only to guide the eye.}\label{fig3}
\end{figure}

Figure 1
displays the mass dependence of E$_{bal}$ for four impact parameter bins. The solid (open) green circles indicate
 E$_{bal}$ for systems with lower (higher) N/Z. Lines are power law fit $\varpropto$ A$^{\tau}$. Left (right) panels are for mass dependence of E$_{bal}$ when
 we include (exclude) A = 48. First we discuss the left panels for all the four bins. E$_{bal}$ follows a power law behavior
$\varpropto$ A$^{\tau}$ for both N/Z = 1 and 1.4 ($\tau$ being labeled as $\tau_{1.0}$ and $\tau_{1.4}$ for systems having
N/Z = 1 and 1.4, respectively) at all colliding geometries. There are small deviations from power law behavior
for heavy mass systems with N/Z = 1 at peripheral colliding geometry. Isospin effects are clearly visible for all the
  four bins as neutron-rich system has higher E$_{bal}$ throughout the mass range in agreement with the previous
  studies \cite{pak97,li96,gaum10}.

  \begin{table}
\caption{Same as table 1 but for calculations with Coulomb potential reduced by a factor of 100.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline

&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{$\tau_{1}$}&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{$\tau_{1.4}$}\\\cline{2-5}
b/b$_{max}$&  With A=48 &Without A=48  &With A=48  &Without A=48 \\\cline{1-5}
        BIN 1    &-0.25$\pm$ 0.02  &-0.17$\pm$ 0.02  &-0.26$\pm$ 0.03  &-0.14$\pm$ 0.01 \\\cline{1-5}
 \hline BIN 2    &-0.25$\pm$ 0.02  &-0.17$\pm$ 0.02  &-0.28$\pm$ 0.02  &-0.19$\pm$ 0.02 \\\cline{1-5}
 \hline BIN 3    &-0.33$\pm$ 0.02  &-0.24$\pm$ 0.03  &-0.33$\pm$ 0.02  &-0.26$\pm$ 0.01 \\\cline{1-5}
 \hline BIN 4    &-0.41$\pm$ 0.02  &-0.31$\pm$ 0.03  &-0.41$\pm$ 0.02  &-0.29$\pm$ 0.02 \\\cline{1-5}
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}

\begin{figure}[!t] \centering
\vskip 0.5cm
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=10cm]{fig3.eps}
\vskip 0.5cm \caption{(Color online) E$_{bal}$ as a function of impact parameter for
different system masses. Various symbols have same meaning as in Fig.1. Lines are only to guide the eye.}\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
The magnitude of isospin effects increases with increase in mass of the system at all colliding geometries. The effect
is much more pronounced at larger colliding geometries. One can see that the difference between
$\tau_{1.0}$ and $\tau_{1.4}$ increases with increase in the impact parameter (green circles). In Ref. \cite{gaum210}, Gautam and Sood studied the isospin
effects on the mass dependence of E$_{bal}$ for BIN 2. There they reduced the Coulomb potential by a factor of 100 and showed that the Coulomb
repulsion plays dominant role over symmetry energy in isospin effects on E$_{bal}$ as well as its mass dependence
 at semi central colliding geometry (BIN 2). Since here we plan to extend
that study over a full range of colliding geometry, so here also we reduce the Coulomb potential by a factor
of 100 and calculate the E$_{bal}$ throughout the mass range at all colliding geometries. Solid (open) diamonds
 represent E$_{bal}$ calculated with reduced Coulomb for systems with lower (higher) neutron content.
  Lines are power law fit $\varpropto$ A$^{\tau}$. Interestingly, we find that:\\
(a) the magnitude of isospin effects (difference in E$_{bal}$ for a given pair)
is now nearly same throughout the mass range which indicates that the effect of symmetry energy is uniform
throughout the mass range. This is true for all the colliding geometries. This is supported by
 Ref. \cite{sood204} where Sood and Puri studied the average density as a function of mass of the system
 (throughout the periodic table) at incident energies equal to E$_{bal}$ for each
given mass. There they found that although both E$_{bal}$ and average density follows a power law behavior $\varpropto$ A$^{\tau}$, E$_{bal}$ decreases more sharply with the
 combined mass of the system (with $\tau$ = -0.42), whereas the average
density (calculated at incident energy equal to E$_{bal}$) is almost independent of the mass of the system with $\tau$ = -0.05.
It is worth mentioning here that the trend will be different at fixed incident energy in which case density increases with increase
 in the mass of the system \cite{blatt,khoa}. We also note that the power law with reduced Coulomb is now absolute for N/Z = 1 (solid diamonds fig. 1 (d)).
 This indicates that the deviations from power law behavior for heavy mass systems (with N/Z = 1) are due to the
 dominance of Coulomb repulsion.\\
 (b) one can also see that the enhancement in E$_{bal}$ (by reducing
Coulomb) is more in heavier
 systems as compared to lighter systems for
 all colliding geometries. The effect is more pronounced at higher colliding geometries. \\
 (c) throughout the mass range at all
  colliding geometries, the neutron-rich systems
 have a decreased E$_{bal}$ as compared to neutron-deficient systems when we reduce the Coulomb. This trend is quite the opposite to the one
 which we have when we have full Coulomb. This (as explained in Ref. \cite{gaum210} also) is due to the fact that the reduced
Coulomb repulsion leads to higher E$_{bal}$. As a result, the
density achieved during the course of the reaction will be more
due to which the impact of the repulsive symmetry energy will be
more in neutron-rich systems, which in turn leads to a decreased
E$_{bal}$ for neutron-rich systems.
\par
Now to discuss how the value of $\tau$ changes if we exclude lighter systems (right panels in fig. 1), we display in fig. 2 the variation
of $\tau$ as a function of impact parameter.
 Solid (open) symbols
are for full (reduced) Coulomb. Triangles (pentagons) represent $\tau$ with (without) A = 48. For full Coulomb (upper left panel), $\tau_{1.4}$
increases with increase in impact parameter but the increase is independent of inclusion/exclusion of lighter mass. On the other
hand, $\tau_{1}$ increases drastically with impact parameter (upper right panel). Moreover, the increase in $\tau_{1}$ (with impact parameter)
 is more sharp when we take into account only heavier masses (pentagons) as compared to when lighter mass systems are also included (triangles).
Thus as we have discussed in Ref. \cite{gaum210} also that if we take into account only
 heavier systems, the value of $\tau$ is more as compared to if we include lighter systems as well. Here we see enhancement
 of this effect with increase in colliding geometry showing the increased role of Coulomb repulsion in mass dependence of
E$_{bal}$ at high impact parameter.
    In lower left panel, for reduced Coulomb, we see the values of $\tau_{1}$ and $\tau_{1.4}$
 increases much less sharply with increase in colliding geometry and this increase is almost independent of N/Z of the system
 which shows that the effect of isospin-dependent cross section and
 symmetry energy on the mass dependence of E$_{bal}$ is independent of N/Z throughout the colliding geometry. The same is true if we consider
 only heavier systems as well (lower right panel). As we have seen in fig. 1, the effect of symmetry energy is uniform throughout the mass range
 at all colliding geometries, this means that the effect of cross section must also be nearly same through the mass range and colliding geometry.
 We will come to this point later. It is worth mentioning that since IQMD reproduces the data nicely \cite{gaum10} so the experimental values of tau are not expected to differ much from the values of tau given in table 1.

 \par
\begin{figure}[!t] \centering
\vskip 0.5cm
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=10cm]{fig4.eps}
\vskip 0.5cm \caption{(Color online) E$_{bal}$ at central and peripheral colliiding geometries
for A = 116 (upper panel) and A = 240 (lower panel) with no nucleon-nucleon collisions (Hexagons). Circles
represent the calculations with collisions.}\label{fig4}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[!t] \centering
\vskip 0.5cm
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=10cm]{fig5.eps}
\vskip 0.5cm \caption{(Color online) The time evolution of collision rate ($\frac{dN_{coll}}{dt}$) for various
system masses at 50 MeV/nucleon for BIN 1 and BIN 4. Various lines are explained in the text .}\label{fig4}
\end{figure}

 In fig. 3a, 3b, and 3c, we display E$_{bal}$ as a function of $\hat{b}$ for masses 116, 192, and 240, respectively, for both full
 and reduced Coulomb. Symbols have the same meaning as in fig. 1. For full Coulomb (green circles), for all the masses at all colliding
 geometries, system with higher N/Z has larger E$_{bal}$ in agreement with previous studies \cite{li96,pak97,mag00}. Moreover,
  the difference between E$_{bal}$ for a given mass
 pair, increases with increase in colliding geometry. This is more clearly visible in heavier masses. Also for N/Z = 1.4, E$_{bal}$ increases with increase in
 impact parameter in agreement with Ref. \cite{mag00}. This is due to the decreased participant zone in
 peripheral collisions which decreases the amount of repulsive nn collisions and therefore
  higher energy is required to overcome the attractive nuclear force. This effect is less pronounced in heavier
systems since even at peripheral geometry significant number of nn collisions will occur. Moreover,
 the effect of stronger Coulomb repulsion in heavier systems will increase with colliding
 geometry since it will push more number of nucleons in the transverse direction away from participant zone.
  However for N/Z = 1, increase in E$_{bal}$ with impact parameter is true only for lighter mass system such as A = 116.
 For heavier masses E$_{bal}$ infact
 begins to decrease with increase in impact parameter in contrast to the previous studies \cite{li96,pak97,gaum10,mag00}.
 However, when we reduce the Coulomb (by a factor of 100 (diamonds)),
 we find that:
 \par
  (i) Neutron-rich systems have a decreased E$_{bal}$ as compared to neutron-deficient systems as mentioned
  previously also. This is true at all the
colliding geometries throughout the mass range. This clearly shows the dominance of Coulomb repulsion over symmetry energy in isospin effects throughout the mass range at all colliding geometries.
\par
(ii) The difference between E$_{bal}$ for systems with different N/Z remains almost constant as a
function of colliding geometry which indicates that the effect of symmetry energy is uniform throughout the range of $\hat{b}$ as well. This also shows that
the large differences in E$_{bal}$ values for a given isobaric pair are due to the Coulomb repulsions.
 \par
(iii) In heavier systems, at high colliding geometry, the increase in E$_{bal}$  is more in systems with N/Z =1 compared to N/Z = 1.4 which shows the
much dominant role of Coulomb repulsion at high colliding geometry.
\par
To see the relative contribution of Coulomb repulsion and cross section
in lighter and heavier systems, we switch off the collision term and calculate the E$_{bal}$ for A = 116 and 240 at two extreme bins. The results are displayed
in fig. 4. Hexagons represent the calculations without collisions. Other symbols have same meaning as in fig. 1. We find that at a given impact parameter
E$_{bal}$ increases by large magnitude for both systems which shows the importance of collisions. The increase is of the same order for
both the masses at both impact parameter bins indicating the same role of cross section for both lighter and heavier masses as we have
expected in discussion of fig. 2. This is supported by
Ref. \cite{sood204,blatt}, which shows that since mean field is independent of the mass of the system, so one needs the same amount of collisions to counter
balance the mean field in both lighter and heavier masses. Moreover, the same order of increase of E$_{bal}$ at central and peripheral colliding geometry
(when we switch off the collisions) indicates the importance of collisions at high colliding geometry as well. The effect that
E$_{bal}$ decreases with increase in impact parameter (due to dominance of Coulomb) for heavy mass systems with N/Z = 1 (fig. 3 lower panel)
 does not appear here for lighter and
heavier masses. Therefore in fig. 3, the reduced Coulomb allows one to examine the balance of nn collisions and mean field while in fig. 4
the removal of nn collisions allows one to examine the balance of Coulomb and mean field.
\par
As we have seen in fig. 4 that E$_{bal}$ is much higher than the actual E$_{bal}$ when we switch off
the cross section, so to explore whether Coulomb repulsion affects the collisions in the E$_{bal}$ domain, we display in fig. 5 collision rate
 $\frac{dN_{coll}}{dt}$ for A = 48 (upper panel), 116 (middle panel), and 240 (bottom panel) at incident energy of 50 MeV/nucleon. Solid (dashed) lines represent
 Coulomb full (reduced) calculations. Higher (lower) peaks represent results for central (peripheral) impact parameter.
 We find that Coulomb decreases the collision rate in medium and heavier mass systems for central bins whereas for peripheral bins, the effect
 of Coulomb on collisions is only for heavier masses (lower panel). Comparing
 top and bottom panel we see that there are still significant number of collisions at peripheral geometry.
\section{Summary}
We have studied the isospin effects in the disappearance of flow
as well as its mass dependence throughout the mass range 48-270 for two
sets of isobaric systems with N/Z = 1 and 1.4 in the whole range
of colliding geometry. Our results clearly demonstrate the
dominance
 of Coulomb repulsion in isospin effects on E$_{bal}$ as well as its
mass dependence throughout the range of colliding geometry. The above study also shows that the effect of symmetry
energy on E$_{bal}$ and cross section is uniform throughout the
mass range and colliding geometry. We have also presented the counter balancing of nn collisions and mean field by reducing the Coulomb and the counter
balancing of Coulomb and mean filed by removing the nn collisions.
\par
This work has been supported by a grant from Indo-French Centre For The Promotion Of Advanced Research (IFCPAR) under project no. 4104-1.