Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: the three - dimensional velocities of the magellanic clouds , from proper motion measurements using @xmath4 advanced camera for surveys ( acs ) and a sample of background qsos ( kallivayalil et al .  2006a , b , hereafter k1 and k2 ; see also piatek et al . 2008 , kallivayalil et al . 2009 ) , are @xmath5 higher than those used in past theoretical modeling of the magellanic stream ( ms ) and , for the lmc , now approach the escape velocity of the milky way ( mw ) . consequently , as shown by besla et al .  ( 2007 ) , in a @xmath6cdm - based model for the mw the clouds , assuming they form a bound system , are likely on their first passage . this claim has re - ignited the discussion about the origin of the clouds . did they form in the outer regions of the local group or as satellite galaxies of the mw ? proposals for the latter , i.e. , that bind the clouds to the mw , include the explicit use of smaller velocities , for example , by giving the lmc & smc a common halo ( bekki 2008 ) as well as modified newtonian dynamics ( mond ) gravity ( wu et al .  2008 ) . a recent study by shattow & loeb ( 2009 ) argues that the past orbit of the lmc is naturally confined within the virial radius of the mw if a @xmath7% increase in the mw circular velocity ( reid & brunthaler 2004 ; reid et al . 2009 ) is taken in combination with the lower end of the allowed proper motion error - space . apart from uncertainties in the mw potential , other puzzles remain , such as the high angular momentum of the lmc system ( e.g. fich & tremaine 1991 ; gott & thuan 1978 ) . even with the modest values for transverse velocity ( @xmath5 ) and apogalacticon distance ( 200 kpc ) used in past ms models , a mass of @xmath8 gives the following for the orbital angular momentum , @xmath9 , of the lmc : @xmath10 . this is equivalent to the spin angular momentum of the galactic disk , @xmath11 , with standard values of @xmath12 , @xmath13 kpc and @xmath14 ( sawa & fujimoto 2005 ) . since the lmc is in a roughly polar orbit , these angular momenta make right angles to each other . this problem has seen many past iterations : besla et al . ( 2007 ) show that the lmc may be on a parabolic orbit , and hence the ` angular momentum problem ' is moot . however , in this case an explanation of why the lmc is moving so quickly and on such a different orbit from the other satellites is warranted . for example , fich & tremaine ( 1991 ) comment that the maximum line - of - sight velocity of the ms ( @xmath15 ; brns et al . 2005 ) is not only higher than that of the clouds themselves ( @xmath16 ) but also higher than any mw satellite within 200 kpc . morphological studies of the satellite populations of the mw and m31 arrive at a similar impasse . van den bergh ( 2006 ) argues that the fact that the clouds are gas - rich dirr galaxies and yet occupy the small galactocentric distances usually dominated by dsph galaxies may be accounted for by assuming that they are interlopers that were originally formed in the outer reaches of the local group . raychaudhury & lynden - bell ( 1989 ) contended that m31 was close enough to the lmc in its early orbital history to cause a significant tide , and that this tide was oriented such as to generate the high orbital angular momentum of the clouds . it is worth noting here that their analysis was done in the context of external tides on the mw - m31 system from more distant galaxies . building on this theory , shuter ( 1992 ) and byrd et al . ( 1994 ) considered the possibility that the clouds underwent a close encounter with m31 having only recently been captured by the mw . given our new velocities it is especially pertinent to not consider the lmc - smc - mw system in isolation and to explore whether the clouds may have been subject to external torques before entering the environs of the mw . we revisit this classic problem of quantifying the torque provided by m31 using the framework of the timing argument / two - body limit of the least action principle , given two new pieces of information : the new proper motions for the clouds _ and _ a new transverse velocity estimate for m31 from satellite velocities ( van der marel & guhathakurta 2008 ; hereafter vg08 ) . shattow & loeb ( 2009 ) also included the effect of m31 in their analysis of whether the lmc is bound to the mw . we confirm the results in   4 of their paper but take a different approach here . within the framework of the timing argument / two - body limit of the least - action principle , could m31 have generated the high transverse velocities of the clouds ? there are 4 main effects on the clouds orbits that bear exploring : 1 ) the effect of total local group mass , @xmath17 ; 2 ) the effect of @xmath18 ; 3 ) the effect of m31 proper motion ; and 4 ) the effect of varying the proper motion of the lmc . there is a large range in values for @xmath17 because this is a quantity that can not be directly measured without modeling . various methods give a range of @xmath19 ( kochanek 1996 ; wilkinson & evans 1999 ; klypin et al . 2002 ; vg08 ) . the quantity @xmath20 is also hard to constrain observationally and we look at a range of values from 0.8 - 2.0 ( einasto & lynden - bell 1982 ; evans & wilkinson 2000 ; klypin et al . 2002 ; vg08 ) . recent vlba measurements might favor @xmath20 closer to unity ( reid et al . the proper motion of m31 has not been directly measured , but as mentioned above , indirect estimates exist and indicate that it is small ( vg08 ) . we investigate the full range of values from the literature . finally , the proper motion of the lmc is the only observationally well - constrained quantity in this analysis ( k1 ) and we test the whole error - space using a monte - carlo distribution .    the primary goal is to assess whether the inclusion of m31 in the equations of motion of the clouds can generate a significant torque on the l / smc orbit . in addition , we keep track of the magnitude of the relative tidal force on the lmc from the mw and m31 to quantify whether there are orbits in which the m31 tide is higher . the tide is calculated simply via a double radial differentiation of the potential at the location of the l / smc . while the locations of the center - of - mass of the l / smc are allowed to move under the influence of the two more massive bodies , the potential shapes in all simulations are kept fixed . motivated by the findings of this analysis , we apply the timing argument to the mw and lmc , assuming that the lmc is on its first passage with the previous perigalacticon being a hubble time , @xmath21 , ago , to calculate the mass of the mw . in most of the subsequent analysis we present results only for the lmc and intend our conclusions to be representative of the lmc - smc system as a whole . it remains a possibility that the clouds are not in a binary system ( k2 ; piatek et al . we do not explicitly investigate this further as it is still possible to find a binary orbit in the error space of the smc for every given lmc orbit . also , a chance three - body interaction ( mw - lmc - smc ) seems highly unlikely . it has been speculated , for instance , that the clouds are members of a small subgroup that was captured by the local group ( metz et al . 2009 ) , or that fell into the mw at late times ( donghia & lake 2009 ) . given their mass ratio ( @xmath22 ) the smc is not expected to play a major role in shaping the orbit of the lmc . we thus carry out the analysis assuming that the orbital path of the clouds will be dependent on that of the lmc , but we do include the perturbative effect of the smc on the lmc given the smc mean velocity in all our calculations ( note , however , that this is an orbit in which the clouds are unbound to each other ) . we await smaller proper motion errors for the smc ( see   [ conclusion ] ) to lift these assumptions .    in   [ lgmodel ] we recount briefly the work on the relative motion of the mw and m31 and use this as the motivation for our local group model and methods . in  3 we present results including changes to the orbital history of the lmc given these new models . we also present the results for mw mass . we conclude in   [ conclusion ] . the local group is thought to be decoupled from the cosmological expansion and gravitationally bound . this is supported by the fact that its two major constituents , the mw and m31 , are seen to be approaching each other with a radial velocity of @xmath23 ( binney & tremaine 1987 ) . the tangential motion of m31 has not been directly measured , but indirect estimates ( vg08 ; loeb et al .  2005 ; peebles et al . 2001 ) indicate that this tangential motion is small , and thus support the assumption that the local group is bound . some simple dynamical arguments about the the local group can be made based on known facts . in 1959 , kahn & woltjer proposed the ` timing argument ' , in which the mw and m31 first moved apart due to general cosmological expansion , subsequently reversed paths and are now falling into each other under their own gravitational attraction , their motions being governed by newtonian dynamics . assuming a zero angular momentum orbit ( zero tangential motion ) and the known current separation and radial velocity , the timing argument requires a mass in the local group @xmath24 to fulfill this trajectory . an alternative explanation would be that the mw and m31 are accidentally passing by , but if the galaxies have moved at a constant speed for a hubble time , their separation would have changed only by @xmath25 mpc , i.e. , less than the distance to the next largest galaxy . so this is not a promising alternative ( peebles 1993 ) .    a more sophisticated treatment of the dynamics of the local group , pioneered by peebles ( 1989 ; 1990 ; shaya et al . 1995 ; peebles et al . 2001 ) , involves using the principle of least - action to calculate orbital solutions from incomplete phase - space information by assuming homogeneity of the early universe ( see also goldberg & spergel 2000 ; goldberg 2001 ) . note , however , that the two - body limit to this solution is equivalent to the timing argument , since the equation of relative motion has the same form as the cosmological acceleration equation in the case of the evolution of a homogeneous , isotropic mass distribution ( peebles 1993 ) . the timing argument has been investigated and applied widely in the literature ( mishra 1985 ; raychaudhury & lynden - bell 1989 ; kroeker & carlberg 1991 ; goldberg 2001 ) . two recent extensions of the formalism bear further comment : ( 1 ) chernin et al . ( 2009 ) include the antigravity effect of dark energy in the kahn - woltjer model and find a larger local group mass than in traditional methods of @xmath26 ; ( 2 ) vg08 applied the timing argument to obtain a total mass for the local group , after first deducing a transverse velocity for m31 from satellite velocities . the methods they use for the latter are a statistical analysis of the line - of - sight velocities of 17 m31 satellites , a study of the proper motions of two satellites m33 and ic 10 ( from brunthaler et al . 2005 , 2007 ) , and an analysis of the line - of - sight velocities of 5 galaxies near the local group turn - around radius . a full monte carlo analysis of all the uncertainties involved produces a value of @xmath27 for the median of the probability distribution of the galactocentric tangential velocity of m31 , with @xmath28 confidence interval @xmath29 ( thus the radial orbit applied by kahn & woltjer is allowed in their solution ) . the inferred @xmath28 confidence interval around the median local group mass obtained from application of the timing argument is @xmath30 . while this mass is consistent with most applications of the timing argument , it is on the high end of what is predicted from @xmath6cdm motivated galaxy models ( klypin et al . 2002 ; li & white 2008 ) . using theoretical constraints to narrow the large space of solutions allowed by uncertainties in satellite velocities and in halo extent , the klypin et al . models for m31 and the mw have a favored total mass of @xmath31 ( with a maximum upper - limit of roughly twice this amount ) . the reason for the discrepancy is unclear , the general wisdom being that the timing argument provides too simplistic a view of mass - accretion . however , some studies ( kroeker & carlberg 1991 ) have investigated its accuracy in a cosmological context and found it an adequate approximation to the true mass .    our aim is not to build a ` true ' local group but rather to investigate maximal m31 models , i.e. , models in which m31 can hope to generate large torques on the lmc orbit . thus the timing argument provides a natural framework in which to carry out these investigations . we estimate the effect of m31 by building on the timing argument and considering some representative cases of the entire paramater - space : we vary the total local group mass , @xmath17 , from @xmath32 and also consider two cases for the proper motion of m31 - the mean value from vg08 as well as a radial orbit . table  1 summarizes the quantities varied , the step - size of the variation or error - space explored . we solve the two - body problem for the motion of m31 relative to the mw in the same mw - centered coordinate system ( @xmath33 ) that we used for the clouds ( see k1 and van der marel et al . 2002 ) and then include m31 s potential in the equations of motion for the clouds , knowing the distance between the clouds and m31 at every time - step . in solving for the radial orbit we assume a distance modulus of 24.47 ( mcconnachie et al . 2005 ; ribas et al .  2005 ) , a radial velocity ( of m31 relative to the mw ) of @xmath34 ( binney & tremaine 1987 ) and a current location for m31 of ( ra = @xmath35 , dec = @xmath36 , j2000.0 ) . for the non - radial case we simply adopt the six phase - space parameters supplied by vg08 . given the adopted initial conditions , we are free to choose the total mass ( represented here as @xmath37 ) ) so as to specify the time in the past at which the mw and m31 were co - located . figure  [ rm31mw ] shows the resulting motion of m31 with respect to the mw in our galactocentric frame for a few different values of @xmath38 and a radial orbit . as expected , orbits with total mass @xmath39 do not ` turn around ' within @xmath21 . in figure  [ rm31mw ] we show that as @xmath40 increases , the turn around time decreases ; the dotted line shows the past orbit for @xmath41 , the solid line shows the case of @xmath42 and the dashed line for @xmath43 . the non - radial orbits have the same qualitative behavior with mass and we do not plot them here . as in vg08 , all quantities are found to vary monotonically with the tangential velocity of m31 : larger values of tangential velocity lead to larger values of total mass , the period of the orbit and the pericentric distance . we show the full hubble time evolution of the orbit in figure  [ rm31mw ] simply as a heuristic exercise . there is little value in extending our static analysis to significantly earlier times than 5 gyr ago since stellar ages imply that the galactic disk ( and presumably the halo ) had not been fully assembled at @xmath44 ( wyse 2007 ; cox & loeb 2008 ) . once the mutual separation of m31 and mw is known it is easy to introduce a potential term for m31 in the equations of motion for the l / smc : @xmath45 + \frac{{\rm f}_{l}}{m_l } , \end{array}\ ] ] where @xmath46 is the galactocentric distance of the lmc , @xmath47 that of the smc and @xmath48 that of m31 . @xmath49 is the potential of the smc , @xmath50 is the potential of the mw and @xmath51 is that of m31 . @xmath52 is the dynamical friction on the lmc orbit and @xmath53 is the mass of the lmc . there is an equivalent equation for the smc . in this model for the local group , the mw and m31 are both approximated as isothermal spheres with @xmath54 , @xmath55 and @xmath56 ( loeb et al . 2005 ) . to be consistent with the total mass used in our 2-body formulation we introduce a cut - off radius , @xmath57 , outside which the density drops to zero ( see van der marel et al . 2002 ) : @xmath58 the enclosed mass is : @xmath59    the lmc and smc are represented using plummer models : @xmath60^{1/2},\ ] ] with effective radii ( @xmath61 ) of 3 and 2 kpc , and masses ( @xmath62 ) of @xmath63 and @xmath64 , respectively . the final term , @xmath65 , accounts for dynamical friction on the lmc orbit resulting from its motion through the mw dark halo , for which we use the chandrasekhar formula ( binney & tremaine 1987 ) : @xmath66 \mathbf{v}_{l , s}\right\ } , \end{array}\ ] ] where @xmath67 and @xmath68 is the density of the mw halo at the galactocentric distance of the l / smc . the strength of this force depends on the mass of the l / smc , and since we are integrating backwards in time from the current positions and velocities , the sign of the dynamical friction term is that of acceleration ( see figure  2 ) . our results do not depend sensitively on the form of this drag because as shown in  3.1 it does not alter the l / smc orbit in such a way as to bring them significantly closer to m31 in the past . our conclusions do nt change even if it is ignored . further , we do not include dynamical friction from m31 in our calculations because , as discussed in the next section , the lmc s closest approach to m31 in the past 5 gyr is roughly 500 kpc . thus dynamical friction from m31 is negligible . we use a monte carlo scheme to randomly draw 20,000 lmc proper motion components from the errors in k1 . from these initial values we allow the lmc orbit to propagate backward in time in the local group model described in   [ lgmodel ] . the smc proper motion is kept fixed at its mean value ( k2 ) . we keep track of the orbits that take the lmc closest to and furthest from m31 . as laid out in the introduction , we explore the effects of 1 ) @xmath69 ; 2 ) @xmath20 ; 3 ) m31 proper motion ; and 4 ) lmc proper motion on the past orbital history of the clouds . it was found that as @xmath17 increases , the orbital period and apogalacticon of the lmc orbit is smaller , as one might expect . however , @xmath17 does not have any direct bearing on the relative importance of m31 in the lmc s past . the question becomes , given a value of @xmath17 , what are the salient changes to the lmc orbit from varying @xmath20 , the lmc proper motion and m31 s proper motion ? the largest change to the orbit comes from varying the lmc proper motion , followed by changes in @xmath20 . the proper motion of m31 , by contrast , does not dramatically alter the picture . it acts much like @xmath17 : larger values of m31 proper motion require larger values of @xmath17 to fulfill the trajectory of the timing argument . the currently accepted error - space of m31 s proper motion does not alter its relative distance to the lmc dramatically . however , the proper motion of the lmc does . we summarize the results in figure  [ 2bodyresults ] . the black solid line shows the orbit with @xmath70 , @xmath71 , mean lmc proper motion and mean m31 proper motion ( from vg08 ) . this can be compared to the black dotted line which is the orbit obtained in a mw - only local group ( with @xmath72 ) . note that this mw differs from our ` infinite mass ' fiducial model in k2 in that it is modeled with a cut - off radius and thus fixed total mass . we realize this is a larger mw mass than indicated by either observations or @xmath6cdm modeling but emphasize that we are trying to understand the relative importance of m31 in lmc dynamics for which @xmath17 itself turns out to be unimportant . varying @xmath17 pushes the lmc orbit to larger or shorter period , but the qualitative picture remains . as for the choice of mass distribution , we contend that the treatment of m31 as an isothermal sphere is adequate because , as described below , the lmc does not come closer than @xmath73 kpc . as for the choice of mass distribution for the mw , we showed in figure  8 in besla et al . ( 2007 ) that the trajectories of the lmc line up in projection regardless of whether an isothermal sphere or nfw ( navarro et al .  1996 ; 1997 ) profile are used . thus , replacing the isothermal spheres here with nfw models is equivalent to looking at lower values of @xmath17 : the lmc would effectively escape sooner from the mw in the past and with lower velocity , but at the same time , m31 would be further away . the dashed pink lines in figure  [ 2bodyresults ] mark the boundaries of @xmath74 ( minimal m31 model ) and @xmath75 ( maximal m31 model ) for fixed @xmath17 . the green lines enclose the space of solutions given by lmc proper motion : the lmc orbits with closest approach to m31 have the mean western lmc proper motion , @xmath76 , in the range of @xmath77 , while the furthest orbits are for @xmath78 . these also naturally correspond to unbound and bound orbits to the mw , respectively . the northern component of the proper motion , @xmath79 , does not affect the trajectory as dramatically ( see figure  [ fitparams ] ) .    within a period of 5 gyr , the closest orbits bring the lmc within @xmath73 kpc of m31 , while the furthest orbits come within @xmath80 kpc . since the distance to m31 is relatively large throughout the duration of our calculations and tides drop off as @xmath81 it seems unlikely that m31 would have a pronounced effect on the orbits of the clouds , and this is the case for most of the parameter - space that we search . however , for a range of lmc proper motions @xmath82 the torque provided by m31 can be significant . in figure  [ fitparams ] we show the closest distance to m31 reached by the lmc as a function of the lmc s @xmath83 , and their corresponding error circles . the black dots are for @xmath84 , the green dots for @xmath85 , the blue dots for @xmath86 and the pink dots for @xmath87 . the m31 tangential velocity is that of vg08 . there is a clear dependence on @xmath76 but not on @xmath79 . for the case of @xmath88 and @xmath89 , the final relative velocity between the lmc and m31 is smaller than the escape velocity of m31 , but the relative distance is larger than @xmath90 . as @xmath17 increases the value of @xmath76 must also in general increase for this to be the case . varying @xmath20 broadens the distributions in figure  [ fitparams ] ( _ left _ panel ) by decreasing ( high @xmath20 ) or increasing ( low @xmath20 ) the distances of closest approach . figure  [ aitoff ] shows the past orbits of the clouds in aitoff projection , centered on the mw . the pink triangle , blue diamond and red square mark the current positions of the lmc , smc and m31 respectively . again , the m31 tangential velocity is that of vg08 . we do not show the m31 orbit here because , as in the case of the radial orbit , the trajectory in aitoff projection is roughly constant . for a given @xmath17 the pink solid line shows the lmc orbit trajectory that takes it closest to m31 , while the pink dashed lines show the corresponding furthest orbits . the blue dotted line shows the mean smc orbit for reference . as seen in figure  [ 2bodyresults ] , m31 does provide a small amount of tidal pull on the lmc orbit compared to a mw - only local group even for the mean velocities . however , m31 can only _ alter _ the orbit of the lmc if the lmc is moving roughly @xmath91 faster than we think , i.e. , it is not bound to the mw at all . for these cases the tidal influence of m31 is larger than that of the mw ( solid pink line ) and the final relative velocity between the lmc and m31 is lower than the escape velocity of m31 , even though the relative distance is larger than @xmath90 . if we do allow our calculations of these particular orbits to run for @xmath21 ( not shown here ) , the lmc eventually becomes bound to m31 . however , accounting for the hierarchical build - up of the local group , this analysis becomes inaccurate past 5 gyr . the plot looks qualitatively the same when varying @xmath17 . figure  [ tides ] quantifies the strength of the tidal force exerted on the lmc by the mw and m31 as a function of time . the tidal force is calculated by twice differentiating the gravitational potential of the galaxy in question at the position of the lmc , even though strictly the tidal field is a traceless tensor that requires tangential derivatives as well . the radial derivative is proportional to the tide only for a perturbed body of constant size ( see gardiner & noguchi 1996 ) but is instructive here given our methods . figure  [ tides ] ( _ left _ ) shows the relative tidal forces on the lmc orbit that is furthest from m31 ( bound to the mw ) , and on the right for the lmc orbit that comes closest to m31 ( unbound to the mw ) . the dotted line shows the tidal force exerted by the mw and the dashed lines shows the same for m31 . the m31 tide takes over for orbits moving @xmath1 faster than the mean , but is insignificant for lower values of lmc velocity . if the lmc is indeed on its first passage about the mw then we can use the timing argument to estimate the total mass of the lmc - mw system . this is not strictly a correct application of the timing argument because for a small galaxy such as the lmc , the details of the neighboring mass distribution become important and can not be treated as homogeneous and isotropic . even so , it is instructive to see what kind of limits the timing argument places on the mass of the mw given the assumption that the lmc and mw are encountering each other for the first time . since the current position and velocity of the lmc relative to the mw is known , this specifies the semi - major axis of the relative orbit via the cubic equation @xmath92 where @xmath93 is the semi - major axis , @xmath94 is the mean motion , and @xmath95 and @xmath96 are the position and velocity at time zero . if @xmath97 gyr ( hinshaw et al . 2008 ) , we can solve uniquely for @xmath98 . a monte - carlo analysis of the errors in lmc velocity gives : @xmath99 which is in good agreement with @xmath6cdm - based estimates for the mass of the mw ( e.g. , klypin et al . it is lower than recent observational estimates based on vlba measurements by about a factor of 2 ( reid et al . we have studied the past orbital histories of the clouds in a model for the local group whose properties are constrained using the timing argument . this study has been motivated by the substantial increase in the tangential velocity of the lmc ( k1 ; piatek et al . 2008 ; kallivayalil et al . 2009 ) and thus the possibility that the lmc is on its first passage about the mw ( besla et al . 2007 ) , as well as a new assessment of the tangential velocity of m31 ( vg08 ) . the timing argument provides a natural framework within which to test the effect of ` maximal ' m31 models on the past orbit of the lmc . the goal is to evaluate whether , as in raychaudhury & lynden - bell ( 1989 ) for instance , tidal torques exerted by m31 are important for the lmc . we investigate the effects of @xmath17 , @xmath100 , m31 proper motion and lmc proper motion . we find that @xmath17 and m31 proper motion both act in the same way : larger values of m31 tangential velocity lead to larger values of @xmath17 , period and pericentric distance of the mw - m31 orbit . these in turn affect the period and peri / apogalactic distances of the mw - lmc orbit , but within the accepted error - space , m31 proper motion does not significantly affect the trajectory of the lmc orbit . @xmath17 does affect the trajectory of the orbit if m31 is sufficiently massive ( @xmath101 ) and if the western component of the lmc proper motion , @xmath76 is increased by roughly @xmath1 . the amount of this increase depends on @xmath17 . however , for the rest of the explored parameter - space , the influence of m31 is negligible . furthermore , it is unlikely that we have underestimated the proper motion of the lmc by this amount , and thus conclude that the m31 tide is likely insufficient in generating the high angular momentum of the lmc orbit . in other words , the angular momentum problem remains . finally , motivated by the fact that the lmc could be on its first passage about the mw , we calculate the implied mw+lmc mass if they were last co - located a hubble time ago . a monte - carlo analysis of the errors gives : @xmath102 . since @xmath103 , this quantity is roughly the mass of the mw , and is in good agreement with @xmath6cdm predictions ( e.g. , klypin et al . 2002 ) . it is clear from this analysis that the large tangential motion of the lmc can not be easily explained away with manipulations of the local group model . confirming this large motion is a high priority . in kallivayalil et al .  ( 2009 ) we presented an ongoing analysis of the proper motions of the magellanic clouds using a third epoch of wfpc2 data centered on background quasars . the results so far as consistent with those presented in k1 . at present the rms error in the position of the quasar is roughly 3 times as large for wfpc2 as for acs . however , with an improved method to deal with charge - transfer efficiency and magnitude - related effects , and with the increase in time - baseline from 2 to 5 years , we expect final error bars for the proper motions that are smaller by a factor of @xmath104 from k1 . this , combined with our understanding of the properties of the ms , will allow us to better constrain the orbit of the clouds and make more specific predictions as to their origin . bekki , k.  2008 , , 684 , l87 besla , g. , kallivayalil , n. , hernquist , l. , robertson , b. , cox , t.  j. , van der marel , r.  p. , & alcock , c.  2007 , , 668 , 949 binney , j.   & tremaine , s.  1987 , galactic dynamics , ( princeton : princeton univ . press ) brns , c. , et al . 2005 , , 432 , 45 brunthaler , a. , reid , m.  j. , falcke , h. , greenhill , l.  j. , & henkel , c.  2005 , science , 307 , 1440 brunthaler , a. , reid , m.  j. , falcke , h. , henkel , c. , & menten , k.  m.  2007 , , 462 , 101 byrd , g. , valtonen , m. , mccall , m. , & innanen , k.  1994 , , 107 , 2055 chernin , a.  d. , teerikorpi , p. , valtonen , m.  j. , byrd , g.  g. , dolgachev , v.  p. , & domozhilova , l.  m.  2009 , arxiv:0902.3871 cox , t.  j. , & loeb , a.  2008 , , 386 , 461 donghia , e. , & lake , g.  2009 , iau symposium , 256 , 473 einasto , j. , & lynden - bell , d.  1982 , , 199 , 67 evans , n.  w. , & wilkinson , m.  i.  2000 , , 316 , 929 fich , m. , & tremaine , s.  1991 , , 29 , 409 gardiner , l.  t. , & noguchi , m.  1996 , , 278 , 191 goldberg , d.  m. , & spergel , d.  n.  2000 , , 544 , 21 goldberg , d.  m.  2001 , , 550 , 87 gott , j.  r. , iii , & thuan , t.  x.  1978 , , 223 , 426 hinshaw , g. , et al . 2008 , arxiv:0803.0732 kahn , f.  d. , & woltjer , l.  1959 , , 130 , 705 kallivayalil , n. , van der marel , r.  p. , alcock , c. , axelrod , t. , cook , k.  h. , drake , a.  j. , & geha , m.  2006a , , 638 , 772 ( k1 ) kallivayalil , n. , van der marel , r.  p. , & alcock , c.  2006b , , 652 , 1213 ( k2 ) kallivayalil , n. , van der marel , r.  p. , anderson , j. , besla , g. , & alcock , c.  2009 , iau symposium , 256 , 93 klypin , a. , zhao , h. , & somerville , r.  s.  2002 , , 573 , 597 kochanek , c.  s.  1996 , , 457 , 228 kroeker , t.  l. , & carlberg , r.  g.  1991 , , 376 , 1 li , y .- s . , & white , s.  d.  m.  2008 , , 384 , 1459 loeb , a. , reid , m.  j. , brunthaler , a. , & falcke , h.  2005 , , 633 , 894 mcconnachie , a.  w. , irwin , m.  j. , ferguson , a.  m.  n. , ibata , r.  a. , lewis , g.  f. , & tanvir , n.  2005 , , 356 , 979 metz , m. , kroupa , p. , theis , c. , hensler , g. , & jerjen , h.  2009 , , 697 , 269 mishra , r.  1985 , , 212 , 163 navarro , j.  f. , frenk , c.  s. , & white , s.  d.  m.  1996 , , 462 , 563 navarro , j.  f. , frenk , c.  s. , & white , s.  d.  m.  1997 , , 490 , 493 peebles , p.  j.  e.  1989 , , 344 , l53 peebles , p.  j.  e.  1990 , , 362 , 1 peebles , p.  j.  e.  1993 , principles of physical cosmology , ( princeton : princeton univ . press ) peebles , p.  j.  e. , phelps , s.  d. , shaya , e.  j. , & tully , r.  b.  2001 , , 554 , 104 piatek , s. , pryor , c. , & olszewski , e.  w.  2008 , , 135 , 1024 raychaudhury , s. , & lynden - bell , d.  1989 , , 240 , 195 reid , m.  j. , & brunthaler , a.  2004 , , 616 , 872 reid , m.  j. , et al . 2009 , arxiv:0902.3913 ribas , i. , jordi , c. , vilardell , f. , fitzpatrick , e.  l. , hilditch , r.  w. , & guinan , e.  f.  2005 , , 635 , l37 sawa , t. , & fujimoto , m.  2005 , , 57 , 429 shattow , g. , & loeb , a.  2009 , , 392 , l21 shaya , e.  j. , peebles , p.  j.  e. , & tully , r.  b.  1995 , , 454 , 15 shuter , w.  l.  h.  1992 , , 386 , 101 van den bergh , s.  2006 , , 132 , 1571 van der marel , r.  p. , alves , d.  r. , hardy , e. , & suntzeff , n.  b.2002 , aj , 124 , 2639 van der marel , r.  p. , & guhathakurta , p.  2008 , , 678 , 187 ( vg08 ) wilkinson , m.i . , & evans , n.w . 1999 , mnras , 310 , 645 wu , x. , famaey , b. , gentile , g. , perets , h. , & zhao , h.  2008 , , 386 , 2199 wyse , r.  f.  g. ,  2007 , in iau symposium vol . 77 , lessons from surveys of the galaxy , pp 1036 - 1046    llll @xmath17 ( @xmath105 ) ................................................. & @xmath106 & @xmath107 & - + @xmath20 ................................................................ & @xmath108 & 0.1 & - + m31 tangential velocity ( @xmath109 ) ............ & 0 ; 42 & - & @xmath110 + lmc proper motion ( @xmath111 ) @xmath112 & 0.44 , -2.03 & monte carlo dist . & 0.05 , 0.08 + smc proper motion ( @xmath111 ) @xmath112 & -1.17 , -1.16 & - & fixed +      ; black solid line ) and when it is not ( black dotted line ) . for a given @xmath17 , the pink lines mark the effect of a maximum m31 model ( @xmath116 ) and a minimum m31 model ( @xmath74 ) . the green lines mark the lmc orbit that comes closest to m31 , @xmath117 increase in @xmath76 ( marked @xmath118 ) , and the furthest orbit , @xmath119 decrease in @xmath76 ( marked @xmath120 ) . ]      . the pink solid line shows the lmc orbit trajectory that takes it closest to m31 in the past , while the pink dashed lines show the corresponding furthest orbits . the blue dotted line shows the mean smc orbit . ]
Abstract:

Answer: we study the dynamics of the magellanic clouds in a model for the local group whose mass is constrained using the timing argument / two - body limit of the action principle . the goal is to evaluate the role of m31 in generating the high angular momentum orbit of the clouds , a puzzle that has only been exacerbated by the latest @xmath0 proper motion measurements . we study the effects of varying the total local group mass , the relative mass of the milky way and m31 , the proper motion of m31 , and the proper motion of the lmc on this problem . over a large part of this parameter - space we find that tides from m31 are insignificant . for a range of lmc proper motions approximately @xmath1 higher than the mean and total local group mass @xmath2 , m31 can provide a significant torque to the lmc orbit . however , if the lmc is bound to the mw , then m31 is found to have negligible effect on its motion and the origin of the high angular momentum of the system remains a puzzle . finally , we use the timing argument to calculate the total mass of the mw - lmc system based on the assumption that they are encountering each other for the first time , their previous perigalacticon being a hubble time ago , obtaining @xmath3 .


Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: in 1936 bethe and bacher @xcite and in 1938 hafstad and teller @xcite predicted that alpha particle structures @xcite could be present in atomic nuclei . convincing arguments for existence of such structures were provided by systematics of the binding energies of the even - even nuclei with equal number of protons and neutrons ( see also @xcite ) , as well as by systematics of the binding energy of the additional neutron in nuclei like @xmath3b , @xmath4c and @xmath5o . the latter systematics could be explained by assuming that the valence neutron moves in a multi - center potential with centers identified with alpha particles . today , in a commonly accepted point of view one considers that alpha particle clusters can appear in the nuclear matter at subsaturation densities . such conditions are met e.g. at the nuclear surface where , in not too heavy nuclei , almost the whole nuclear mass is concentrated . subtle changes of the ground state energy of atomic nuclei as a function of nucleon number can be described by the shell model , which neglects correlations between nucleons . the main idea of the present approach is to verify whether these subtle changes , in case of @xmath6-alpha nuclei , could be attributed to the appearance of alpha - like clusters which modify the structure of the wave function and introduce strong correlations between nucleons . in such an approach the system in its ground state behaves like a crystal , with stationary configuration and shape and with definite distances between the wave function centers for a given nucleus . the subtle changes of the binding energy due to appearance of alpha - like clusters in the wave functions of @xmath6-alpha nuclei will be determined within an extended version of the model proposed in @xcite . it will be shown in the following that the hypothesis of alpha structures in the @xmath6-alpha nuclei can indeed describe the binding energy systematics of bethe @xcite . it will be also shown that the hypothesis of the alpha structures helps to understand the evolution of the root mean square ( rms ) radii and of the density profiles as a function of the number of alpha particles in the @xmath6-alpha nuclei . the paper is organized as follows : section 2 describes the adopted interactions in the nuclear matter . section 3 presents constraints on the introduced parametrization resulting from the properties of light charged particles . section 4 is devoted to the ground state properties of @xmath6-alpha nuclei . first , it investigates the effects of clusterization on the ground state configurations . then , some corrections to the hamiltonian , related to the many body character of the nuclear interaction and to the bosonic nature of the wave function are introduced . it will be shown that the introduced corrections make the structural corrections stronger . finally , the model predictions for binding energies , rms radii and density profiles are presented and compared with the experimental values . section 5 contains conclusions . in order to predict correctly a state and evolution of a nuclear system a reliable description of the interaction between nucleons is needed . in case of a strong interaction it is not an easy task . as we know the fundamental theory governing the nucleon - nucleon interactions is the quantum chromodynamics ( qcd ) , where interactions are calculated from the physics of quarks and gluons . unfortunately , very limited progress has been achieved in application of qcd for the description of interaction between quark - gluon clusters . therefore a phenomenological approach , associated to some specific conditions has been applied . since we are interested in the low - energy region in which nucleons are not excited internally , one can treat nucleons as quasi elementary particles . additionally , if we apply a non - relativistic approximation , the mutual nucleon interaction can be described by a respective potential . as can be found in the text books , details of the form of such a potential are deduced from nuclear interaction symmetries and mechanism of exchange of bosons .    for a final test of this type of a potential and the determination of its parameters one uses a comparison with the experimental data . here the nucleon - nucleon scattering data or light nuclei properties are usually used . a general conclusion from this kind of research is that a simple two body potential is not sufficient to describe the behavior of the system of more than two nucleons . one should add at least the three - body force . in particular , in the nuclear system , the three - body force is acceptable because the strong interaction is generated by the exchange process of gluons . the n - body interaction can be interpreted as coming from the multi - pion exchange processes . these considerations show the difficulties in the description of even the simplest nuclear system . the extension of the description of interaction by the three - body forces shows that the exchanged particles ( bosons ) play a significant role in the interaction process .    in order to describe dynamics of the system one has to express the change of energy associated with its evolution . in the description of energy through the potential one has to define its form . hence the wave function of a system of identical particles must be either symmetric or antisymmetric and it must be taken into account when defining the energy of the ground state . in case of the fermionic systems one should use antisymmetric wave function which is a serious difficulty in the description of the collision dynamics . some proposals to solve this problem are shown for instance in @xcite . other approaches , introducing some kinds of the momentum dependent pauli potentials and pauli - blocking schemes , which are meant to mimic the effects of antisymmetrization and are much less time consuming , are also proposed , see e.g. @xcite . therefore , in the present approach , we propose a description in which particles are distinguishable and energy associated with the fermionic motion affects the resulting energy density which is parametrized and used instead of the potential . such a concept is present in the description of the liquid drop model ( ldm ) and in some density functional models , e.g. in @xcite . it is obvious that such an approach requires the knowledge of the local density of matter and the knowledge of the wave function describing the system . in the present description we use a standard one , commonly applied in such cases , i.e. the wave function is defined as a simple product of minimal wave packets ( eq . ( 1 ) ) , as e.g. in @xcite . the main argument for disregarding the antisymmetrization in the present approach is the form of the proposed eos which includes the spin and isospin terms . these terms force the unlike nucleons to form `` bosonic '' alpha - like clusters for which , presumably , the antisymmetrization may no longer play a decisive role .    each minimal wave packet in the adopted wave function has a defined spin and a specific charge for a selected quantization axis :    @xmath7    @xmath8    where @xmath9 , @xmath10 , @xmath11 , are the width ( the position variance of the @xmath12-th nucleon ) of a gaussian wave packet and the mean position and mean momentum of each of the @xmath13 nucleons , respectively . every partial wave function is labeled by @xmath14 and @xmath15 , denoting the isospin and spin ( or precisely , their projections on a specified quantization axis ) associated with a given nucleon . variables @xmath16 , @xmath17 and @xmath9 are , in general , time - dependent parameters describing the wave functions .    in the present approach the nuclear matter is treated as a four component fluid characterized by the respective densities :    @xmath18 - for protons with spin up ,    @xmath19 - for protons with spin down ,    @xmath20 - for neutrons with spin up ,    @xmath21 - for neutrons with spin down . density distributions in the system are uniquely determined by parameters of the wave function ( mean position , mean momentum and variance of the position of each nucleon ) . the description of the system evolution due to the time evolution of these parameters is , in general , defined by the dirac - frenkel time - dependent variational principle @xcite . this approach describes the interaction in a self - consistent way .    assuming that nucleons are moving inside the nuclear system , the average energy of the system is a sum of the average potential energy and of kinetic energy associated with the fermionic motion this is the case when one disregards the energy of the ordered motion , which for the low excitations of the system is considered later on as a correction ( see formula ( [ eq : ham ] ) ) .    according to the above idea we now present a method of determining the average energy associated with each nucleon . for the description of this average energy we assume the existence of a scalar field @xmath22 , determined by the local densities @xmath23 . if , for every @xmath24 nucleon , the corresponding wave packet @xmath25 determines the probability @xmath26 of finding a nucleon at a given point * @xmath27 * then it is assumed that the average energy @xmath28 associated with this nucleon is defined by the mean value and variance of the field @xmath22 and can be expressed as :    @xmath29    where : @xmath30    @xmath31    and @xmath32 is a parameter related to the surface energy , similarly as in @xcite . the eos of the nuclear matter is defined for an infinite system , assuming its homogeneity and isotropy . for such a matter , variance of the associated field @xmath22 vanishes and the average value of the energy per nucleon is determined by the mean value of the field alone . the field @xmath22 is in this case equivalent to the eos of the nuclear matter . thus , the functional form of the field @xmath22 can be obtained from the eos by applying the local density approximation .    in the present work we use a 12-parameter cubic form of the eos proposed in @xcite . in the vicinity of the saturation density it can be approximated using a second order taylor expansion :    @xmath33    @xmath34    @xmath35    @xmath36    where :    @xmath37    @xmath38    @xmath39    @xmath40    in which @xmath41 and @xmath42 are the total nuclear matter density and the density of isospin and spin balanced matter at saturation , respectively . the first two terms in ( [ eq : eos_4 - 1 ] ) are just a standard , 6-parameter form of the eos approximation commonly used in the present day experimental and theoretical studies , see e.g. @xcite . the first term describes the symmetric matter in a balanced system ( zero isospin and spin ) , with @xmath43 being the compressibility of the symmetric nuclear matter . the second one is a standard approximation of the symmetry energy :    @xmath44    with @xmath45 being the wigner constant and the coefficients @xmath46 and @xmath47 being the slope and curvature , respectively . the last two terms of ( [ eq : eos_4 - 1 ] ) are the main novelty of the present approach ( see also @xcite ) . in analogy to the isospin symmetry energy , they describe the spin symmetry energies for neutrons and protons separately :    @xmath48    and the energy of the mutual , spin interaction of protons and neutrons :    @xmath49    the terms with indices @xmath50 , i.e. the @xmath51 , @xmath52 and @xmath53 , ( constant , slope and curvature ) describe the energy of protons or neutrons . indices @xmath54 indicate that the symmetry energy refers to the mutual interaction of protons and neutrons . determination of the expansion parameters in ( [ eq : eos_4 - 1 ] ) will be discussed in the next chapters . using the field @xmath22 one can express the average value of the hamiltonian for a given system of a nucleons as :    @xmath55    where @xmath56 is the nucleon mass and the last term describes the coulomb energy . as later on we will be searching for the ground state configurations of the even - even nuclei with @xmath57 , it can be assumed that the average momenta of the wave packets @xmath17 are equal to zero and , thus , the first term in the expression ( [ eq : ham ] ) can be neglected . following a standard approach ( see e.g. @xcite ) it is assumed that the parametrization of the eos includes implicitly the kinetic contribution coming from the fermi motion . as has been demonstrated in @xcite , the adopted cubic approximation of the eos is flexible enough to reproduce typical predictions of sophisticated models of the nuclear matter which explicitly take into account the kinetic contribution resulting from the fermi motion . since the local density can be written as : @xmath58 the average value of the hamiltonian can be expressed as : @xmath59 as one can see the hamiltonian is a sum of three components , which can be interpreted as a volume , surface and coulomb energies . therefore the present description can be interpreted as a microscopic realization of the ldm . finding the ground state configuration of a group of a nucleons within the adopted parametrization of the wave function and for given parameters of the eos , consists in finding the values of parameters @xmath9 , @xmath10 , and @xmath60 , which minimize the value of hamiltonian . the procedure of finding the ground state configurations has been described in sect . 4 of @xcite . we would like to emphasize that the proposed parametrization of the eos , with two more terms in ( 6 ) , is responsible for driving the nucleons of different types , p@xmath61 , p@xmath62 , n@xmath61 , n@xmath62 , to form quadruplets , i.e. to group into @xmath0-like clusters during the minimization procedure . these two terms play a similar role as the standard symmetry term which attains a minimum when the neutron - proton asymmetry @xmath63 of ( 7 ) tends to zero , i.e. when the neutron - proton couples group together . this @xmath0-like clustering property of ( 6 ) , is demonstrated in figure [ figmin ] . p@xmath61 , 3@xmath64p@xmath62 , 3@xmath64n@xmath61 and 3@xmath64n@xmath62 ) during the minimization procedure . the insets 1 - 6 show the projections of the configurations of nucleons on the x - y plane at selected stages of the minimization . panel 1 represents the random initial configuration . panel 6 shows the projection of the final ground state configuration of @xmath65c . ]    the histogram in fig . [ figmin ] presents the evolution of the binding energy of 12 nucleons during the process of searching for the ground state configuration which minimizes the model hamiltonian ( 16 ) . the 6 panels of the inset show `` snapshots '' of the projections of the mean positions of the nucleon wave packets onto the x - y plane , at selected stages of the minimization procedure . panel 1 presents the initial random configuration , panels 2 - 5 some intermediate ones and panel 6 shows the final ground state configuration of @xmath65c . as can be seen , the minimum of the hamiltonian is achieved for a configuration with three @xmath0-like clusters . these clusters appear in the corners of an equilateral triangle . note , that in the figure the triangle is not perfectly equilateral due to the 2-dimensional projection . it has to be emphasized , that if clusters are allowed to appear in the considered system the description has to be modified . modifications of the hamiltonian due to clustering will be discussed in section 4.2 . ground state properties of light charged particles , lcp , such as @xmath66 , @xmath2 , @xmath1he or @xmath0 can provide important constraints on parameters which describe interactions in the nuclear matter for at least four reasons . first , one can assume that in their structure clusters of matter ( obviously beyond nucleons ) can be formed . therefore one may expect that clustering of matter has no effect on their binding energies and sizes . second , these lcps do not contain more than one @xmath0 particle and thus one can neglect the @xmath67 interactions ( see sect . 4.2 ) and use the simpler liquid - drop - like hamiltonian ( 16 ) . third , the measured density profiles of these light particles are relatively well described by gaussian distributions which is in line with the adopted parametrization of the wave function . fourth , simplicity of these particles assures vanishing of some types of interactions in ( 6 ) and selective increase of sensitivity to some other ones . for instance , parameters related to the isospin symmetry energy ( second term in ( [ eq : eos_4 - 1 ] ) ) in principle do not affect the binding energy of a deuteron and alpha particle . similarly , due to the saturation of the proton ( neutron ) spin interactions in @xmath1he ( @xmath2 ) , the mutual spin interaction ( fourth term in ( [ eq : eos_4 - 1 ] ) ) vanishes in their case .    in case of lcps we can assume that the average value of the hamiltonian is completely determined by the field @xmath22 , by the coulomb interaction and by the surface energy . this assumption may not be valid for more complex systems in which mutually interacting clusters can be formed , eg . for @xmath68be@xmath69 or @xmath70li@xmath71 . for such systems one can expect additional interactions between clusters due to the specific many - body forces . the mean value of the hamiltonian ( 16 ) depends on 13 parameters : 12 parameters of the field @xmath72 plus the surface tension parameter @xmath32 . binding energies and rms radii of the ground states for @xmath66 , @xmath2 , @xmath1he and @xmath0 provide 8 equations , thus insufficient number of constraints for a unique choice of parameters describing the interaction . in the present section we will try to deduce a subspace of this 13-parameter - space for which the above mentioned properties of lcps are reproduced . it is clear that the greatest reduction of the number of parameters can be expected in case of an alpha particle . here , the spin and isospin dependent interactions are practically absent . thus , properties of alpha particles should be described by four parameters only : @xmath42 , @xmath73 , @xmath43 and @xmath32 . constraints on these parameters are imposed by the rms radius and the binding energy of an alpha . these parameters can not be determined unambiguously . however , there is a flexibility in determining a two - dimensional hypersurface , in the space @xmath42 , @xmath73 , @xmath43 and @xmath32 , in which the searched values of these parameters exist .    in order to determine this hypersurface the following @xmath74 variable is defined : @xmath75 where , @xmath76 are the experimental and model values of the binding energy and rms radius , respectively . note that a variable defined this way should be zero in the searched subspace . , as a function of @xmath73 , @xmath43 and @xmath32 , constrained by the ground state properties of an @xmath0 particle . ]    in order to determine the correlations among the parameters in a searched subspace , the variables @xmath42 and @xmath43 are predefined on a grid , and the remaining two parameters are found by requiring that @xmath77 for the model ground state configurations of an alpha particle . the results are shown in fig . [ fig1 ] . the figure presents the constant saturation density curves as a function of the other three parameters specified on the axis , which ensure a correct binding energy and rms radius of an alpha particle for the model ground state configurations . the dotted and dashed lines show how one can determine the parameters @xmath32 and @xmath73 for a given compressibility @xmath43 and saturation density @xmath42 . in the illustrated example the parameters @xmath78 @xmath79 and @xmath80 mev determine the values of @xmath81 and @xmath82 mev . these values of the parameters have been suggested by additional studies of the competition between coulomb , surface and volume energies in the binding energy calculated for the ground state configurations of the heavier nuclei ( see table 1 ) . this problem will be considered later on . after fixing the parameters @xmath42 , @xmath73 , @xmath43 and @xmath32 let us try to examine the other ones . for @xmath2 and @xmath1he the ground state energy does not depend on the choice of parameters @xmath83 , @xmath84 and @xmath85 . this results from vanishing of the @xmath86 product in the last term of ( [ eq : eos_4 - 1 ] ) . thus , the binding energies and rms radii for @xmath2 and @xmath1he can provide four equations for six unknown eos parameters : @xmath45 , @xmath46 , @xmath47 , @xmath51 , @xmath52 and @xmath53 , and so , two equations are still missing . the two free parameters can be constrained from the properties of heavier nuclei as it was done in the case of the fully symmetric nuclear matter . at this stage it is only possible to examine the subspace defining the limits for the considered parameters from the properties of the @xmath2 and @xmath1he nuclei . we notice the fact that the parameters associated with isospin : @xmath45 , @xmath46 and @xmath47 differentiate between the binding energy and the rms radii of @xmath2 and @xmath1he while the parameters @xmath51 , @xmath52 and @xmath53 affect equally the energy and the size of these particles .    using a similar method as in the case of an alpha particle one can find relationships between the parameters @xmath45 , @xmath47 and @xmath46 , by requiring a precise description of the binding energies and radii of the @xmath2 and @xmath1he particles . here , the values of @xmath45 and @xmath47 were varied independently on a grid and the value of @xmath46 was found from the minimization of ( [ eq : ch2 ] ) . the results of such calculations are shown in fig . [ fig2 ] .    , and curvature , @xmath47 , of the isospin symmetry energy for different wigner energies , @xmath45 , obtained from fitting the binding energies and rms radii of the @xmath2 and @xmath1he . ] the figure presents a relationship between the parameters @xmath45 , @xmath46 and @xmath47 . selection of two of them allows to determine the third one . it should be stressed that the above correlations have been obtained as a result of the procedure reproducing the @xmath2 and @xmath1he ground state properties with the parameters @xmath78 @xmath79 , @xmath80 mev , @xmath81 and @xmath82 mev fixed from the ground state properties of an alpha particle ( fig . [ fig1 ] ) . three other parameters : @xmath51 , @xmath52 and @xmath53 were found to be almost independent of @xmath45 and @xmath87      the final values of the eos parameters adopted in this work have been obtained by taking into account also the binding energy and size of a deuteron . the values have been summarized in tables [ tbl : eos1 ] and [ tbl : eos2 ] . for this example set of values the model reproduces exactly the experimental values of the rms radii and of the binding energies of the @xmath66 , @xmath2 , @xmath1he and @xmath0 particles ( see also figs . [ fig4 ] and [ fig6 ] ) .    from the point of view of the present work , which focuses on the nuclear systems with even and equal numbers of protons and neutrons ( i.e. the spin - balanced matter ) , the parameters : @xmath51 , @xmath52 , @xmath53 and @xmath83 , @xmath84 , @xmath85 from the expansion ( [ eq : eos_4 - 1 ] ) are irrelevant . however , they do play an important role when constructing the ground state configurations and determining the properties of nuclei composed of asymmetric matter . as far as the interactions between neutrons and protons are concerned , the coulomb repulsion between protons causes that the proton matter tends to locate itself in the outer regions of the nucleus . this leads to differences between the neutron and proton density distributions , even for symmetric nuclei , and triggers additional interactions associated with the isospin symmetry energy ( proton or neutron skins can be created ) . this effect can be negligible in case of light nuclei , while for heavier ones it may be more significant . therefore , for heavier nuclei , one has to use a reliable set of isospin symmetry energy parameters @xmath45 , @xmath46 and @xmath47 , even for symmetric nuclear matter . as has been shown above , the binding energies and the rms radii of @xmath2 , @xmath1he and @xmath0 impose certain constraints on the parameters of the eos . in case of the @xmath73 , @xmath42 , @xmath43 and @xmath32 parameters , once two of them are fixed by some other constraints or means , or from some other evidences , the remaining ones can be determined using the obtained correlations ( fig . [ fig1 ] ) . here , the compressibility parameter of symmetric matter @xmath43 should fall within the range of about 250@xmath8850 mev according to the recent experimental constraints ( flow interpretation @xcite , monopole vibrations @xcite , subthreshold kaon production @xcite ) . it has been fixed to 270 mev in the present approximation . the volume energy parameter @xmath73 should take the value of about -16 mev according to the ldm . in the present approximation it has been assumed to have the value of -16.79 mev . the values of the remaining two parameters , @xmath42 and @xmath32 have been then uniquely determined from the correlation plot of fig . [ fig1 ] .    in case of the symmetry energy , the choice of any two parameters out of @xmath45 , @xmath46 , @xmath47 , allows to determine the third one ( fig . [ fig2 ] ) . the compilation @xcite of the latest results of the nuclear physics experiments and astrophysical observations suggests that the value of the symmetry energy constant , @xmath45 , and of the slope parameter , @xmath46 , should fall within a range of about 32 @xmath88 1 mev and of about 59 @xmath88 17 mev , respectively . in the present approximation the values of these parameters have been assumed to be 32 and 59.405 mev , respectively . these values yield the value of @xmath47 to be about -1250 mev , according to the correlation plot of fig . the experimental constraint of @xcite on the symmetry energy compressibility parameter , @xmath47 , yields its value to be about @xmath89 200 mev . another compilation @xcite locates the theoretical values of @xmath47 between @xmath90 and + 466 mev and its experimental values in a range from @xmath91 1350 mev to 34 @xmath88 159 mev . thus , this parameter is least constrained experimentally and theoretically so far . its value obtained within the model , preferring very soft symmetry energy , is consistent with the negative experimental constraint , thanks to its large error bar . however , we should stress that the adopted set of values is not at all unique . as seen from the correlation plots , some other choice of parameters is equally well possible . it should be also emphasized that the assumed value of @xmath42 equal to 0.185 @xmath79 , which fits well properties of the lcps , and is higher than the commonly used values of @xmath92 @xmath79 , may influence values of the remaining parameters .    in order to describe the exotic nuclei and provide more precise parameters of the symmetry energy , definitely some more advanced parameter searches will be needed , involving e.g. fitting the properties of the neutron skin nuclei and also of those approaching the proton drip line across the chart of the nuclides , but this is beyond the scope of the present work . .parameters of the standard eos which together with a parameter of the surface energy @xmath32 are reproducing the ground state energy and rms radius of the alpha particle , @xmath2 and @xmath1he . [ tbl : eos1 ] [ cols="^,^,^,^,^,^,^",options="header " , ]     ) and ( [ eq : dh2 ] ) . the right scale of binding energies per nucleon in the top panel refers to the magnified view for nuclei from @xmath65c to @xmath93ca . the solid ( dashed ) line connects the experimental ( model ) points . ]    the results for the full hamiltonian , including the corrections due to the alpha - alpha interactions are presented in fig . the upper part of the figure shows the binding energies as a function of the atomic number @xmath94 . the bottom part presents the rms radii . much better agreement between the model results and the experiment can be observed now , as compared to fig . [ fig4 ] . some discrepancies can be still noticed especially for @xmath68be for which the distance between the alpha particles is pretty small and much smaller than @xmath95 in the harmonic potential description . again , the properties of particles up to @xmath96he are reproduced perfectly well , because they served as the constraints to fix the eos parameters . figure [ fig7 ] presents a comparison of the model and experimental density profiles for the selected nuclei . the full ( red ) lines represent the experimental profiles and the broken ( blue ) lines result from the model calculations . experimental density profiles were taken from @xcite , however for @xmath97ne and @xmath98ar reliable experimental data were not available . figure [ fig8 ] shows the isodensity contour plots for the model ground state configurations of @xmath68be , @xmath65c , @xmath99o and @xmath97ne . please note that apart from the @xmath99o , which has a tetrahedral shape , all the other nuclei have a planar geometry ( cf . [ fig3 ] ) . similar shape for @xmath65c has been obtained within the fmd @xcite and amd @xcite simulations . in particular , the @xmath97ne case shows that the central @xmath0-like cluster is more diffused than the surface ones . more quantitatively , the standard deviations of the density distributions of surface alphas are of the order of 1.02 fm , while for the core alpha they are of the order of 1.28 fm . figure [ fig9 ] presents a distribution of distances between alpha clusters for the nuclei in question . the distances between clusters from the ground state configurations obtained with the liquid drop - like hamiltonian without corrections are represented by open circles . the distances obtained from the full hamiltonian calculations are represented by closed ones . as can be seen , in the latter case the distances are grouping around 3.5 fm . this can denote that these clusters behave more like rigid spheres . a simple model of nuclei formed out of alpha - like clusters in which interactions lead to strong correlations between nucleons has been presented . the model interactions have been defined using a cubic approximation of the nuclear eos . the proposed eos contains additional terms which take into account the spin and isospin polarizations . these additional terms cause that nucleonic clusters , with an enlarged binding energy , appear in the ground state configurations . these clusters have full spin - isospin symmetry similarly as in @xcite and in @xcite . for @xmath6-alpha nuclei these clusters can be identified as alpha like structures . when these clusters are formed in regions of smaller density , i.e. at the nuclear surface , then their sizes measured as the variance of the density distribution become comparable to the alpha particle size . on the other hand formation of the clusters in the central part of nuclei leads to much bigger spreads of their density distributions and they can hardly be identified as alpha particles .    it has been shown that by taking into account the liquid drop - like form of the hamiltonian in the minimization process it was not possible to describe the subtle changes of the binding energies of nuclei . therefore the liquid drop part of the hamiltonian has been supplemented by the corrections taking into account the cluster - cluster interactions . the ground state configurations obtained from the minimization of the full hamiltonian with the imposed structural constraints were found to reproduce very well the experimental binding energies and sizes of the @xmath6-alpha nuclei and the available density profiles . in particular , the model with the cluster corrections has been able to reproduce the `` fine structure '' of the ground state energy distribution ( inset of fig . [ fig6 ] ) . in this respect it seems to be able to mimic the shell effects without explicit spin - orbit term . the interactions have been defined using a 12 parameter eos approximation . the thirteenth parameter has been added to control the variance of the field for finite systems . the values of these parameters and correlations among them have been constrained using the experimental binding energies and sizes of @xmath66 , @xmath2 , @xmath1he and @xmath0 particles . additional 4 parameters have been introduced in the corrections to the liquid drop part of the hamiltonian in order to account for the interactions between the alpha - like clusters and to substantially improve the model predictions . the differences between the calculated and measured ground state energies for nuclei with z@xmath1008 are about an order of magnitude smaller than those obtained using the liquid drop model . besides , the obtained parameters describe the properties of the @xmath2 , @xmath1he and @xmath0 very accurately ( practically error free ) . it has also been demonstrated that correlations between nucleons in the phase space can play an important role in the description of the ground states , particularly of the ground states of nuclei with the same and even number of neutrons and protons . work supported by polish national science centre ( ncn ) , contract nos . umo-2013/10/m / st2/00624 , umo-2013/09/b / st2/04064 , in2p3 08 - 128 and also by the foundation for polish science - mpd program , co - financed by the european union within the european regional development fund . stimulating discussions with professors lucjan jarczyk , bogusaw kamys , andrzej magiera , zbigniew rudy , roman paneta , andrzej wieloch and janusz brzychczyk are gratefully acknowledged . special thanks to the anonymous referee for many suggestions that improved the original version of the manuscript . the hamiltonian ( 16 ) depends on 13 parameters and since the binding energies and rms radii of the ground states of @xmath66 , @xmath2 , @xmath1he and @xmath0 provide only 8 constraints , 5 of the parameters have to be fixed by some other means .    the first step of the procedure to fix the eos parameters consisted in constraining the values of @xmath43 , @xmath42 , @xmath73 and @xmath32 by the binding energy and rms radius of an alpha particle . this step has been summarized in the flow chart of fig . [ fig10 ] . = [ rectangle , rounded corners , minimum width=3 cm , minimum height=1cm , text centered , text width=8 cm , draw = black ] = [ trapezium , trapezium left angle=70 , trapezium right angle=110 , minimum width=1 cm , minimum height=1 cm , text centered , text width=3 cm , draw = black ] = [ trapezium , trapezium left angle=70 , trapezium right angle=110 , minimum width=1 cm , minimum height=1 cm , text centered , text width=3 cm , draw = black ] = [ rectangle , minimum width=3 cm , minimum height=1 cm , text centered , text width=8 cm , draw = black ] = [ rectangle , minimum width=3 cm , minimum height=1 cm , text centered , text width=3 cm , draw = black ] = [ diamond , minimum width=3 cm , minimum height=1 cm , text centered , draw = black ] = [ thick,->,>=stealth ]    ( start ) [ startstop ] select starting values of @xmath42 and @xmath43 ; ( in1 ) [ io , below of = start , yshift=0.5 cm ] set starting values of @xmath73 and @xmath32 ; ( pro1 ) [ process , below of = in1 , yshift=0.5 cm ] find ground state configuration ( centroids and widths of gaussian wave packets minimizing ( 16 ) ) ; ( pro1b ) [ process , below of = pro1 , yshift=0.5 cm ] calculate binding energy and rms radius of the ground state configuration and calculate @xmath74 of ( 17 ) ; ( dec1 ) [ decision , below of = pro1b , yshift=-0.5 cm ] @xmath77 ? ; ( pro2a ) [ process , below of = dec1 , yshift=-0.5 cm ] increment @xmath42 and/or @xmath43 while within predefined grid ; ( pro2b ) [ process1 , right of = dec1 , xshift=2.7 cm ] vary @xmath73 and @xmath32 ; ( out1 ) [ io1 , below of = pro2a , yshift=0.5 cm ] produce fig . [ fig1 ] ; ( stop ) [ startstop , below of = out1 , yshift=-0.0 cm ] assume values of @xmath43 and @xmath73 consistent with other experimental constraints and obtain the corresponding values of @xmath42 and @xmath32 from the correlation plot ( fig . [ fig1 ] ) ;    ( start )  ( in1 ) ; ( in1 )  ( pro1 ) ; ( pro1 )  ( pro1b ) ; ( pro1b )  ( dec1 ) ; ( dec1 )  node[anchor = east ] yes ( pro2a ) ; ( dec1 )  node[anchor = south ] no ( pro2b ) ; ( pro2b ) |- ( pro1 ) ; ( pro2a.west )  + + ( -5mm,0 ) |- ( in1 ) ; ( pro2a )  ( out1 ) ; ( out1 )  ( stop ) ;    the compressibility parameter of symmetric matter @xmath43 and the volume energy parameter @xmath73 have been fixed within the range of the recent experimental constraints . the values of the remaining two parameters , @xmath42 and @xmath32 are then uniquely determined from the correlation plot of fig . the remaining 9 parameters were irrelevant for the properties of an alpha particle , which greatly simplified the corresponding eos .    in the second step , the parameters @xmath45 , @xmath46 and @xmath47 have been found in an analogous way by using the binding energies and the rms radii of @xmath2 and @xmath1he as constraints in eq . ( 17 ) , by fixing the previously determined parameters @xmath43 , @xmath42 , @xmath73 and @xmath32 , and by disregarding the remaining 6 parameters . finally , the remaining 6 parameters @xmath51 , @xmath52 , @xmath53 , @xmath83 , @xmath84 and @xmath85 have been found by minimizing ( 17 ) with the fixed 7 parameters determined in the previous two steps and using the binding energies and the rms radii of @xmath66 , @xmath2 and @xmath1he as constraints . fitting is done in an analogous way as in the inner loop of the flow chart of fig . [ fig10 ] , replacing the @xmath73 and @xmath32 parameters by the remaining 6 ones . after fixing the 13 parameters of the liquid - drop - like hamiltonian ( 16 ) , the additional four parameters of the @xmath67 interaction , @xmath101 , @xmath102 , @xmath95 and @xmath103 , have been fixed by fitting the ground state binding energies and rms radii of the nuclei from @xmath68be till @xmath93ca . here , in addition the structural constraints i. - iii . have been imposed in the fitting routine , meaning that only the widths of the nucleon wave packets and the inter-@xmath0-like clusters distances could be varied , preserving the imposed configuration .
Abstract:

Answer: description of a nuclear system in its ground state and at low excitations based on the equation of state ( eos ) around normal density is presented . in the expansion of the eos around the saturation point additional spin polarization terms are taken into account . these terms , together with the standard symmetry term , are responsible for appearance of the @xmath0-like clusters in the ground state configurations of the n = z even - even nuclei . at the nuclear surface these clusters can be identified as alpha particles . a correction for the surface effects is introduced for atomic nuclei . taking into account an additional interaction between clusters the binding energies and sizes of the considered nuclei are very accurately described . the limits of the eos parameters are established from the properties of the @xmath0 , @xmath1he and @xmath2 particles .