1: \documentclass{elsart}
2: \usepackage{amsmath}
3: \usepackage{amssymb}
4: \usepackage{graphics}
5: \begin{document}
6:
7: \begin{frontmatter}
8: \title{Eta Photoproduction as a Test of the\\
9: Extended Chiral Symmetry}
10: \author[IEM]{C. Fern\'andez-Ram\'{\i}rez\corauthref{cor}},
11: \corauth[cor]{Corresponding author. Fax: +34915855184}
12: \ead{cesar@nuc2.fis.ucm.es}
13: \author[IEM,UCM]{E. Moya de Guerra},
14: \author[UCM]{J.M. Ud\'{\i}as}
15: \address[IEM]{Instituto de Estructura de la Materia, CSIC,
16: Serrano 123, E-28006 Madrid, Spain}
17: \address[UCM]{Departamento de F\'{\i}sica At\'omica, Molecular
18: y Nuclear, Facultad de Ciencias F\'{\i}sicas,
19: Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Avda. Complutense s/n,
20: E-28040 Madrid, Spain}
21:
22: \begin{abstract}
23: We analyze the $\gamma p \to \eta p$ process from threshold up to 1.2 GeV,
24: employing an effective Lagrangian approach
25: that allows for a mixing of eta couplings of pseudoscalar and pseudovector nature.
26: The mixing ratio of the couplings may serve as a quantitative estimation
27: of the $SU_L(3)\times SU_R(3)$ extended chiral symmetry violation in this energy regime.
28: The data analyzed (differential cross sections and asymmetries)
29: show a preference for the pseudoscalar coupling
30: --- 91\% of pseudoscalar coupling component for the best fit.
31: We stress that a more conclusive answer to this question
32: requires a more complete electromagnetic
33: multipole database than the presently available one.
34: \end{abstract}
35: \begin{keyword}
36: Extended chiral symmetry \sep Eta photoproduction
37: \PACS 11.30.Rd \sep 13.60.Le \sep 14.20.Gk \sep 25.20.Lj
38: \end{keyword}
39: \end{frontmatter}
40:
41: Our knowledge on effective field theories (EFTs) based upon
42: Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) has been enlarged thanks
43: to the development and success of chiral perturbation
44: theory ($\chi$PT) \cite{CHPT}.
45: The starting point for $\chi$PT is QCD reduced to massless
46: quarks $u$ and $d$. Under these assumptions the chiral
47: $SU_L(2)\times SU_R(2)$ symmetry holds and
48: is spontaneously broken into $SU_I(2)$ symmetry, emerging
49: the nucleon as the ground state of the EFT and the
50: pion as the Goldstone boson that mediates
51: the strong interaction in the EFT.
52:
53: Even if the quarks $u$ and $d$ masses are strictly nonzero, they are small
54: and relatively close, so that chiral symmetry is a well-established approximate
55: symmetry of the strong interaction.
56: Indeed,
57: chiral symmetry requires a vanishing $\pi NN$ coupling
58: for vanishing pion momentum.
59: The simplest way to achieve this is
60: by means of a pseudovector coupling to the pion
61: \cite{Burgess}.
62: The extension of $\chi$PT to strange particles has been investigated
63: in the last years
64: \cite{CHPT2,Kaiser95,Kaiser97,Kolomeitsev,Inoue,Nieves,Doring06}
65: with the extended chiral symmetry (E$\chi$S)
66: $SU_L(3)\times SU_R(3)$ whose validity is more debatable.
67: This symmetry is spontaneously broken into $SU_V(3)$ symmetry and
68: eight Goldstone bosons emerge:
69: four non-strange pseudoscalar mesons
70: ($\pi^\pm$, $\pi^0$, and $\eta$) and
71: four strange pseudoscalar mesons ($K^\pm$, $K^0$, and $\bar{K}^0$).
72: One can appreciate that
73: the E$\chi$S is not restored as a good symmetry at the same level as standard
74: chiral symmetry looking at the differencies among the masses of the meson
75: octect \cite{PDG2006}.
76: The question arises about how important this breakdown of E$\chi$S arises
77: already at the level of EFT or whether any restoration effect might happen
78: in reactions, beyond the mass differences of hadrons or mesons belonging to
79: E$\chi$S multiplets.
80:
81: This Letter is devoted to the $\gamma p \to \eta p$ process
82: and the nature of the coupling of the $\eta$ particle, as
83: a possible indication of violation of the E$\chi$S.
84: The study of the eta photoproduction process is well motivated
85: from both theoretical and experimental points of view. This is due to the
86: relation of the eta to the E$\chi$S and the study of the electromagnetic
87: properties of the nucleon excitations as well as to the
88: experimental programs on eta photoproduction
89: developed in several worldwide facilities over
90: the last years \cite{experiments,Price,Krusche,Renard}.
91: We focus on the nature of the coupling of the eta
92: to the nucleon and its excitations,
93: mainly the N(1535) which presents a large $\eta N$ branching ratio
94: and dominates the threshold behavior of the eta photoproduction reaction.
95: Whereas the pion coupling is usually chosen pseudovector because of the
96: chiral symmetry, there is no compelling
97: \textit{ab initio} reason to decide that the $\eta$ meson has to be either
98: pseudoscalar (PS) or pseudovector (PV). However,
99: if the E$\chi$S were exactly fulfilled, the eta would couple to
100: the nucleon and its excitations through purely PV couplings with no PS admixture,
101: as in the case of pions.
102: Hence, if
103: the PS-PV mixing ratio $\varepsilon$ of the coupling could be reliably derived
104: from experimental data, it might provide a quantitative
105: indication of E$\chi$S breakdown in the nucleon mass energy regime.
106: With this aim, we explore whether the $\eta NN$ and $\eta N N^*$ vertices are
107: either of PS, PV, or PS-PV mixing nature by fitting an effective Lagrangian model to data.
108:
109: One must be well aware that in meson-baryon to meson-baryon processes
110: PS and PV couplings are indistinguishable,
111: because they provide the same amplitude \cite{Benmerrouche, Gridnev,Friar}.
112: Thus, meson photoproduction emerges as the ideal way to distinguish between both
113: couplings. The contribution of the anomalous magnetic moment of the proton
114: makes a difference in the amplitudes \cite{Benmerrouche} originating
115: from PV or PS couplings.
116: We study whether, within the presently available experimental information, it is
117: feasible to extract the possible PS contribution to the amplitude and test
118: the E$\chi$S in the meson sector.
119:
120: E$\chi$S is at the basis of an extensive study of
121: the nucleon and its excitations by means of
122: eta photoproduction \cite{Kaiser97,Doring06} and
123: meson scattering \cite{Inoue} using chiral unitary approaches.
124: Coupled-channel chiral unitary models have been succesful in describing certain resonances as dynamically generated states, for instance, N(1535) \cite{Kaiser95,Inoue,Nieves},
125: N(1520) \cite{Kolomeitsev} and N(1650) \cite{Nieves}.
126: However, the nature of the N(1535), N(1520) and N(1650) is debatable.
127: Standard quark models \cite{Capstick00}, for instance, provide the right quantum
128: numbers and mass predictions \cite{Doring06} for these baryon states.
129: Despite of the success of these models, one must be aware of the fact
130: that meson-baryon scattering cannot be used to test E$\chi$S.
131: The possible PS-PV mixing cannot be unveiled by these
132: processes due to the fact that, on-shell, both the PV
133: and the PS couplings yield the same amplitudes for meson-baryon scattering.
134: As already mentioned, to study the possible PS-PV mixing one has to explore
135: photoproduction reactions.
136: The eta photoproduction process has been described within the chiral unitary approach with different
137: results. In Ref. \cite{Kaiser97}, the authors succeeded in reproducing the total cross section within
138: a computation which allows for terms in the Lagrangian that explicitly break the E$\chi$S, while
139: the computation of the total cross section in \cite{Doring06} needs
140: further improvements to achieve results in as good agreement with the data as the ones presented in \cite{Kaiser97} and in this Letter.
141:
142: In this Letter we present a realistic model of the $\gamma p \to \eta p$
143: reaction based upon the effective Lagrangian approach (ELA),
144: that from the theoretical point of view is a very suitable
145: and appealing method to study meson photoproduction
146: and nucleon excitations.
147: Recently, we presented a model for pion photoproduction on free
148: nucleons based on ELA \cite{fernandez06}.
149: In this Letter, we extend this model to the
150: eta photoproduction process.
151: The model includes Born terms and $\omega$ and $\rho$
152: vector mesons as well as
153: nucleon resonances up to 1.8 GeV mass and up to spin-3/2,
154: covering the energy region from threshold up to 1.2 GeV of
155: photon energy in the laboratory frame.
156: The model is fully relativistic and displays
157: gauge invariance and crossing symmetry among other relevant features
158: that will be pointed out throughout this Letter.
159:
160: We choose the $\eta NN$ interaction to be
161: \begin{equation}
162: {\mathcal L}_{\eta NN}^{\text{PS-PV}}= g_{\eta NN} \left[
163: \frac{\left( 1-\varepsilon \right)}{2M}
164: \bar{N}\gamma_\alpha \gamma_5 N
165: \partial^\alpha \eta
166: -i\varepsilon \bar{N}\gamma_5 N \eta
167: \right] ,
168: \end{equation}
169: where $M$ is the mass of the nucleon,
170: $g_{\eta NN}$ is the $\eta NN$ coupling constant,
171: and $\varepsilon$ is the mixing parameter which runs from 0 to 1.
172: Both $g_{\eta NN}$ and $\varepsilon$ will be fitted to data
173: within their physical ranges.
174: The pure PS ($\varepsilon=1$) and PV ($\varepsilon=0$) choices
175: for the $\eta NN$ coupling have been explored in Ref. \cite{Benmerrouche}.
176: In this Letter we go further,
177: not only because we allow for a mixing of PS and PV couplings through
178: the parameter $\varepsilon$ but also because we apply
179: the mixing to both Born terms and nucleon resonance contributions.
180:
181: The mixing idea has been previously used in studies of the effect of
182: meson-exchange currents in muon capture by $^3$He \cite{truhlik}
183: and to pion scattering \cite{Gridnev}. The latter
184: obviously provides the same result for both couplings because
185: in the absence of the contribution from the
186: anomalous magnetic moment of the nucleon,
187: PS and PV couplings yield the same amplitudes \cite{Friar}.
188:
189: The electromagnetic coupling to the nucleon ($\gamma NN$ Lagrangian)
190: is given by
191: \begin{equation}
192: \begin{split}
193: {\mathcal L}_{\gamma NN}=&
194: -e\hat{A}^\alpha \bar{N} \gamma_\alpha \frac{1}{2}
195: \left( 1+\tau_3 \right) N \\
196: &-\frac{ie}{4M} \bar{N} \frac{1}{2}
197: \left( \kappa^S+\kappa^V \tau_3 \right) \gamma_{\alpha \beta} N
198: F^{\alpha \beta} ,
199: \end{split}
200: \end{equation}
201: where $e$ is the absolute value of the electron charge,
202: $F^{\alpha \beta}=\partial^\alpha \hat{A}^\beta
203: -\partial^\alpha \hat{A}^\beta$ is the electromagnetic field,
204: $\hat{A}^\alpha$ is the photon field,
205: and $\kappa^S=\kappa^p+\kappa^n=-0.12$ and
206: $\kappa^V=\kappa^p - \kappa^n=3.70$
207: are respectively
208: the isoscalar and the isovector anomalous magnetic moments
209: of the nucleon.
210:
211:
212: Vector mesons are included through the standard Lagrangians
213: ($V= \omega , \rho$) \cite{fernandez06}
214: \begin{equation}
215: \begin{split}
216: {\mathcal L}_V = &-F_{V N N}\bar{N}\left[\gamma_\alpha
217: -i\frac{K_V}{2M}\gamma_{\alpha \beta}\partial^\beta \right]
218: V^\alpha N \\
219: &+\frac{e G_{V \eta \gamma}}{m_\eta}
220: \tilde{F}_{\mu \nu} \left( \partial^\mu \eta \right)
221: V^\nu ,
222: \end{split}
223: \end{equation}
224: with $\tilde{F}^{\mu \nu}=\frac{1}{2}
225: \epsilon^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta} F_{\alpha \beta}$.
226: From Particle Data Group \cite{PDG2006} we take
227: the following values:
228: $m_\eta=547.3$ MeV, $m_{\rho^0}=768.5$ MeV,
229: $m_\omega=782.57$ MeV,
230: $G_{\rho^0 \eta \gamma} =1.06$
231: ($\Gamma_{\rho^0 \eta \gamma}=0.062$ MeV),
232: and $G_{\omega \eta \gamma} = 0.29$
233: ($\Gamma_{\omega \eta \gamma}=0.005486$ MeV).
234: From the analysis of the
235: nucleon electromagnetic form factors performed by Mergell,
236: Mei\ss ner, and Drechsel \cite{MMD} we take the values
237: $F_{\rho NN}=2.6$,
238: $K_\rho =6.1 \pm 0.2$,
239: $F_{\omega NN}=20.86 \pm 0.25$,
240: and $K_\omega=-0.16 \pm 0.01$.
241:
242: \begin{figure}
243: \begin{center}
244: \scalebox{0.46}[0.46]{\includegraphics{feyndiag.ps}}
245: \end{center}
246: \caption{Feynman diagrams for Born terms: (A) s channel,
247: (B) u channel; (C) vector-meson exchange terms; and
248: nucleonic excitations: (D) s channel and (E) u channel.} \label{fig:diag}
249: \end{figure}
250:
251: Besides Born (diagrams (A) and (B) in Fig. \ref{fig:diag})
252: and vector meson exchange terms
253: ($\rho$ and $\omega$, diagram (C) in Fig. \ref{fig:diag}),
254: the model includes six nucleon resonances:
255: N(1520), N(1535), N(1650), N(1700), N(1710), and N(1720)
256: --- diagrams (D) and (E) in Fig. \ref{fig:diag}.
257: Due to the isoscalar nature of the $\eta$ meson,
258: all the nucleon resonances involved are isospin-1/2.
259: An important virtue of the model employed here which overtakes
260: former approaches lies in the treatment of the resonances.
261: We avoid well-known pathologies in the Lagrangians
262: of the spin-3/2 resonances (such as N(1520))
263: of previous models, thanks to a modern approach
264: due to Pascalutsa \cite{Pascalutsa}.
265: This coupling scheme has been applied succesfully
266: to pion photoproduction from the nucleon and provides
267: a better overall description of the behavior of the resonances
268: \cite{fernandez06} than other spin-3/2 coupling schemes \cite{EMoya,Penner}.
269: Under this approach the (spin-3/2 resonance)-nucleon-eta and
270: the (spin-3/2 resonance)-nucleon-photon
271: vertices have to fulfill the condition
272: $q_\alpha \mathcal{G}^{\alpha \dots}=0$ where $q$ is the four-momentum
273: of the spin-3/2 particle, $\mathcal{G}^{\alpha \dots}$ stands for the vertex,
274: $\alpha$ the vertex index which couples
275: to the spin-3/2 field, and the dots stand for other possible
276: indices.
277: Within this prescription, the PS coupling to the eta yields
278: a zero amplitude contribution \cite{Pascalutsa}
279: and, thus, there is no
280: PS-PV mixing for (spin-3/2 resonances)-nucleon-eta Lagrangians.
281: The D$_{13}$ Lagrangian, N(1520) and N(1700) resonances, can be written
282: \begin{equation}
283: \begin{split}
284: {\mathcal L}_{\text{D}_{13}}=&-\frac{H_{\eta NN^*}}{m_\eta M^*} \bar{N}
285: \epsilon_{\mu \nu \lambda \beta} \gamma^\beta
286: \left( \partial^\mu N^{*\nu} \right)
287: \left( \partial^\lambda \eta \right) \\
288: &+ \frac{3e}{4M \left( M+M^* \right)}
289: \bar{N} \left[ i \left( g_1^S+g_1^V \tau_3\right)
290: \tilde{F}_{\mu \nu} \gamma_5 \right. \\
291: &+ \left. \left( g_2^S+g_2^V \tau_3 \right)
292: F_{\mu \nu} \right] \partial^\mu N^{*\nu} + \text{H.c.} ,
293: \end{split} \label{eq:D13}
294: \end{equation}
295: where $M^*$ is the mass of the resonance,
296: $\text{H.c.}$ stands for Hermitian conjugate,
297: $g_{1,2}^S$ and $g_{1,2}^V$ stand for the isoscalar and isovector
298: electromagnetic coupling constants respectively,
299: and $H_{\eta NN^*}$ is the strong coupling constant.
300: The P$_{13}$ Lagrangian, N(1720) resonance,
301: is obtained placing an overall $\gamma_5$ in (\ref{eq:D13}).
302:
303: For S$_{11}$ resonances, N(1535) and N(1650),
304: we build the PS-PV Lagrangian
305: \begin{equation}
306: \begin{split}
307: {\mathcal L}_{\text{S}_{11}}^{\text{PS-PV}}=&
308: \varepsilon iG_{\eta NN^*} \bar{N} N^* \eta
309: -\left( 1- \varepsilon \right)
310: \frac{H_{\eta NN^*}}{m_\eta}\bar{N}\gamma_\alpha
311: N^* \partial^\alpha \eta \\
312: &-\frac{ie}{4M}\bar{N}
313: \gamma_{\alpha \beta}\gamma_5\left(g_S+g_V\tau_3 \right)
314: N^*F^{\alpha \beta} + \text{H.c.}
315: \end{split} \label{eq:S11}
316: \end{equation}
317: Despite the fact that we name two strong coupling constants
318: $H_{\eta NN^*}$ and $G_{\eta NN^*}$, they only represent one parameter
319: in the model because they are both related to the same
320: experimental quantity, the partial decay width of the resonance
321: into the $\eta N$ state, $\Gamma_\eta$.
322: The P$_{11}$ Lagrangian, N(1710) resonance is obtained
323: placing an overall $\gamma_5$ in (\ref{eq:S11}).
324:
325: Dressing of the resonances is considered by means of a
326: phenomenological width which takes into account
327: decays into one pion, one eta and two pions \cite{fernandez06}.
328: The phenomenological width employed is an improvement of those used by
329: Manley et al. \cite{Manley} (inspired by Blatt and Weisskopf factors \cite{Blatt})
330: and Garcilazo and Moya de Guerra \cite{EMoya}.
331: This width is energy dependent and is built so that it fulfills crossing symmetry and contributes to both direct and crossed channels of the resonances.
332: It also accounts for the right angular barrier of the resonance at threshold.
333: Consistency requires to incorporate the energy dependence of the
334: width in the strong coupling constants.
335: In order to regularize the high energy behavior of the model we include
336: a crossing symmetric and gauge invariant form factor for Born and
337: vector meson exchange terms,
338: which contains the only free parameter in the model (the cutoff $\Lambda$)
339: together with
340: the mixing parameter $\varepsilon$.
341: The form factor for Born terms is \cite{Davidson01-1}
342: \begin{equation}
343: \begin{split}
344: \hat{F}_B(s,u,t)=& F(s)+F(u) +G(t)-F(s)F(u) \\
345: -& F(s)G(t)-F(u)G(t)+F(s)F(u)G(t) ,
346: \end{split}
347: \end{equation}
348: where,
349: \begin{eqnarray}
350: F(l)&=& \left[1+ \left( l-M^2 \right)^2/\Lambda^4 \right]^{-1} \: ,
351: \: l=s,u ;\\
352: G(t)&=& \left[1+ \left( t-m_\eta^2 \right)^2/\Lambda^4 \right]^{-1} ;
353: \end{eqnarray}
354: and for vector mesons we adopt $\hat{F}_V(t) = G(t)$ with
355: the change $m_\eta \to m_V$.
356:
357: \begin{table}
358: \caption{Comparison among the PS, PV, and PS-PV prescriptions.
359: The subindex '$3$' stands for the fits where the constrain
360: $g^2_{\eta NN}/4\pi=1.7$ has been imposed and the subindex '$0$' stands for
361: the fits where $g_{\eta NN}$ has been fitted to data.
362: $dof$ stands for degrees of freedom and $\varepsilon$ for the mixing ratio.}
363: \label{tab:varepsilon}
364: \begin{tabular}{lcccc}
365: \hline
366: &$\varepsilon$ & $g^2_{\eta NN}/4\pi$ & $dof$ & $\chi^2/dof$ \\
367: \hline
368:
369: PS$_3$ & 1 & 1.7 & 633 & 15.37 \\
370: PV$_3$ & 0 & 1.7 & 633 & 18.19 \\
371: PS-PV$_3$& 0.99 & 1.7 & 632 & 15.36 \\
372: PS$_0$ & 1 & 1.08 & 632 & 13.91 \\
373: PV$_0$ & 0 & 0.054 & 632 & 15.95 \\
374: PS-PV$_0$& 0.91 & 0.52 & 631 & 13.80 \\
375: \hline
376: \end{tabular}
377: \end{table}
378:
379: In order to assess the parameters of the model we minimize the
380: function
381: \begin{equation}
382: \chi^2 = \sum_{j=1}^{n} \left[\frac{\mathcal{O}^{\text{experiment}}_j
383: -\mathcal{O}^{\text{model}}_j\left(\varepsilon, \Lambda,
384: g_{\eta NN}, \dots \right)}
385: {\Delta \mathcal{O}^{\text{experiment}}_j} \right]^2 ,
386: \end{equation}
387: where $\mathcal{O}$ stands for the observables
388: --- namely differential cross sections and asymmetries
389: (recoil nucleon polarization, polarized target, and polarized beam).
390: We use all
391: the available experimental database up to 1.2 GeV photon energy,
392: a total amount of $n=665$ data points \cite{SAID}.
393: To perform the minimization we have used a
394: genetic algorithm combined with the \texttt{E04FCF} routine
395: (gradient-based routine) from NAG libraries \cite{NAG}.
396: For each prescription of the model we have allowed the parameters
397: (masses, widths, and electromagnetic coupling constants)
398: to vary within the ranges given by the PDG independently.
399: Details on the optimization procedure applied can be found in
400: \cite{thesis}.
401:
402: \begin{figure}
403: \begin{center}
404: \rotatebox{-90}{\scalebox{0.32}[0.32]{\includegraphics{eta_letter.ps}}}
405: \end{center}
406: \caption{Total cross section for the $\gamma p \to \eta p$
407: reaction.
408: Thick lines: Full calculations;
409: Thin lines: B$+$VM contribution.
410: Solid, PS-PV$_0$ fit;
411: Dashed, PS$_0$ fit;
412: Dotted, PV$_0$ fit.
413: Data are from ELSA (solid triangles) \cite{Price},
414: MAMI (open squares) \cite{Krusche}, and
415: GRAAL (solid squares) \cite{Renard}.}
416: \label{fig:xsec}
417: \end{figure}
418:
419: In order to explore the reliability of the E$\chi$S
420: we have performed six fits using three different
421: prescriptions: PS ($\varepsilon=1$), PV ($\varepsilon=0$), and
422: PS-PV where $\varepsilon$ has been fitted to data.
423: Exact E$\chi$S predicts $g^2_{\eta NN}/4\pi=1.7$ \cite{Benmerrouche} so
424: for each kind of fit we have
425: performed fits with and without this constrain.
426: The fits where this condition is imposed are named
427: PS$_3$, PV$_3$, and PS-PV$_3$
428: and the fits where we let $g_{\eta NN}$ run freely within a sensible range
429: are named PS$_0$, PV$_0$, and PS-PV$_0$.
430: In Table \ref{tab:varepsilon} we provide a summary of our results.
431: We will report more extensive results obtained with our eta photoproduction model
432: in a forthcoming publication \cite{eta}.
433: In advance, we provide in Figs. \ref{fig:xsec} and \ref{fig:xsec3}
434: the results for the total cross section.
435:
436: \begin{figure}
437: \begin{center}
438: \rotatebox{-90}{\scalebox{0.32}[0.32]{\includegraphics{eta_letter3.ps}}}
439: \end{center}
440: \caption{Total cross section for the $\gamma p \to \eta p$
441: reaction with $g^2_{\eta NN}/4\pi=1.7$.
442: Thick lines: Full calculations;
443: Thin lines: B$+$VM contribution.
444: Solid, PS-PV$_3$ fit;
445: Dashed, PS$_3$ fit;
446: Dotted, PV$_3$ fit.
447: Data as in Fig. \ref{fig:xsec}.
448: PS$_3$ and PS-PV$_3$ curves overlap.
449: The B$+$VM contribution to PV$_3$ curve is almost negligible.}
450: \label{fig:xsec3}
451: \end{figure}
452:
453: In the energy region near threshold,
454: the contribution of Born terms and vector mesons (B$+$VM in what follows)
455: to the cross section
456: is small compared to the N(1535) resonance contribution, but as energy
457: increases the importance of B$+$VM contribution to the cross section
458: increases and eventually becomes the most important contribution.
459: Therefore, the relevance of the mixing parameter $\varepsilon$ stands out
460: mainly through the $\eta$-N(1535) vertex in the low-energy
461: region and through the $\eta$N vertex in the high-energy region.
462: We find that the B$+$VM background to the
463: cross section is important -- at variance with Ref. \cite{ETAMAID} --
464: and highly dependent on the coupling prescription.
465: In our model we do not account for
466: final state interactions which might be important \cite{fernandez06}
467: in a reliable calculation/fit of the electromagnetic multipoles.
468:
469: The PS and the PV prescriptions provide equally good agreement in the
470: near-threshold region, but as the energy increases and the Born terms
471: become more important, the PV prescription deviates from data
472: (see Figs. \ref{fig:xsec} and \ref{fig:xsec3}).
473: This fact together with the worse $\chi^2/dof$ supports PS coupling
474: as a better option for the phenomenological Lagrangian. Hence,
475: the E$\chi$S seems not to be an adequate underlying symmetry, at least
476: for effective Lagrangians.
477: Differences between PS and PV coupling
478: are visible in the low energy
479: region, not so much in the total cross section as in other observables that
480: are used to fit the parameters of the model, such as
481: single polarization asymmetries and differential cross sections.
482:
483: High-lying resonances contribute more
484: in the high-energy region than in the low-energy one, but
485: they are not the main source of differences between results with PS and
486: PV coupling for the total cross section. These resonances determine the shape
487: of the differential cross section and the asymmetries. Their
488: contribution to the total cross section in the high energy region, though sizeable, is small
489: compared to the one of the tail of the N(1535) resonance plus Born terms
490: and vector mesons contributions.
491:
492:
493: The assumption of one single mixing parameter $\varepsilon$ is not the most
494: general choice. In order to test this assumption we have repeated the fits to data with
495: two $\varepsilon$'s, one related to Born terms and another to the resonances.
496: We have performed the fits varying these parameters independently and
497: no improvement in the $\chi^2/dof$ was found. The PS component remains dominant
498: at the level of 90\% in both the resonances and the Born terms.
499:
500:
501: In summary, we have shown that eta photoproduction is sensitive
502: to the nature of the coupling and, thus, it is able to
503: disentangle PS or PV couplings.
504: More high-quality experimental data, to
505: allow electromagnetic multipole separation, are
506: needed in order to constrain the parameters of the model.
507: This will also allow to study final state interaction effects,
508: which becomes mandatory in order to attain further progress in this topic.
509: Meanwhile, the presented result for the dominance of the PS coupling
510: should be taken with caution.
511: Further research on the nature of the eta-nucleon-baryon coupling becomes mandatory.
512: Kaon photoproduction is another interesting process where the
513: E$\chi$S can be tested following the lines presented in this Letter.
514:
515: \begin{ack}
516: This work has been supported in part under contracts
517: FIS2005-00640 and FPA2006-07393
518: of Ministerio de Educaci\'on y Ciencia (Spain) and by UCM and Comunidad de Madrid
519: under project number 910059 (Grupo de F\'{\i}sica Nuclear).
520: Part of the computations of this work were carried out at the
521: ``Cluster de C\'alculo de Alta Capacidad para T\'ecnicas F\'{\i}sicas''
522: partly funded by EU Commission under program FEDER and by
523: Universidad Complutense de Madrid (Spain).
524: \end{ack}
525:
526: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
527: \bibitem{CHPT} V. Bernard, N. Kaiser, U.-G. Mei\ss ner,
528: Nucl. Phys. B 383 (1992) 442-496; \\
529: H. Leutwyler, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 235 (1994) 165-203.
530: \bibitem{Burgess} C.P. Burgess, Phys. Rep. 330 (2000) 193-261.
531: \bibitem{CHPT2} V. Bernard, N. Kaiser, U.-G. Mei\ss ner,
532: Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 4 (1995) 193-344; \\
533: A.W. Thomas, W. Weise,
534: \textit{The Structure of the Nucleon} (Wiley-VCH, Berlin, 2001).
535: \bibitem{Kaiser95} N. Kaiser, P.B. Siegel, W. Weise,
536: Phys. Lett. B 362 (1995) 23-28.
537: \bibitem{Kaiser97} N. Kaiser, T. Waas, W. Weise,
538: Nucl. Phys. A 612 (1997) 297-320.
539: \bibitem{Kolomeitsev} E.E. Kolomeitsev, M.F.M. Lutz,
540: Phys. Lett. B 585 (2004) 243-252; \\
541: S. Sarkar, E. Oset, M.J. Vicente Vacas,
542: Nucl. Phys. A 750 (2005) 294-323.
543: \bibitem{Inoue} T. Inoue, E. Oset, M.J. Vicente Vacas, Phys. Rev. C 65 (2002) 035204;
544: \bibitem{Nieves} J. Nieves, E. Ruiz Arriola, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 116008.
545: \bibitem{Doring06} M. D\"oring, E. Oset, D. Strottman,
546: Phys. Rev. C 73 (2006) 045209.
547: \bibitem{PDG2006} W.-M. Yao \textit{et al.}, J. Phys. G 33 (2006) 1-1232.
548: \bibitem{experiments}
549: S.A. Dytman \textit{et al.}, Phys. Rev. C 51 (1995) 2710-2715; \\
550: A. Bock \textit{et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 534-537; \\
551: J. Ajaka \textit{et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 1797-1800; \\
552: M. Dugger \textit{et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 222002; \\
553: B. Krusche, S. Schadmand, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 51 (2003) 399-485; \\
554: V. Crede \textit{et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 012004.
555: \bibitem{Price} J.W. Price \textit{et al.}, Phys. Rev. C 51 (1995) 2283-2287.
556: \bibitem{Krusche} B. Krusche \textit{et al.},
557: Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 3736-3739.
558: \bibitem{Renard} F. Renard \textit{et al.}, Phys. Lett. B 528 (2002) 215-220.
559: \bibitem{Benmerrouche} M. Benmerrouche, N.C. Mukhopadhyay,
560: Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 (1991) 1070-1073; \\
561: M. Benmerrouche, N.C. Mukhopadhyay, J.F. Zhang,
562: Phys. Rev. D 51 (1995) 3237-3266.
563: \bibitem{Gridnev} A.B. Gridnev, N.G. Kozlenko,
564: Eur. Phys. J. A 4 (1999) 187-194.
565: \bibitem{Friar} J.L. Friar, B.F. Gibson, Phys. Rev. C 15 (1977) 1779-1782; \\
566: A.M. Bernstein, B.R. Holstein, Comments Nucl. Part. Phys. 20 (1991) 197-220.
567: \bibitem{Capstick00} S. Capstick and W. Roberts,
568: Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 45 (2000) S241-S331.
569: \bibitem{fernandez06} C. Fern\'andez-Ram\'{\i}rez,
570: E. Moya de Guerra, J.M. Ud\'{\i}as,
571: Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 321 (2006) 1408-1456; \\
572: C. Fern\'andez-Ram\'{\i}rez, E. Moya de Guerra, J.M. Ud\'{\i}as,
573: Phys. Rev. C 73 (2006) 042201(R); \\
574: C. Fern\'andez-Ram\'{\i}rez, E. Moya de Guerra, J.M. Ud\'{\i}as,
575: Eur. Phys. J. A 31 (2007) 572-574.
576: \bibitem{truhlik} J.G. Congleton, E. Truhlik, Phys. Rev. C 53 (1996) 956-976.
577: \bibitem{MMD} P. Mergell, U.-G. Mei\ss ner, D. Drechsel,
578: Nucl. Phys. A 596 (1996) 367-396.
579: \bibitem{Pascalutsa} V. Pascalutsa,
580: Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 096002.
581: \bibitem{EMoya} H. Garcilazo, E. Moya de Guerra,
582: Nucl. Phys. A 562 (1993) 521-568.
583: \bibitem{Penner} G. Penner, U. Mosel, Phys. Rev. C 66 (2002) 055212.
584: \bibitem{Manley} D.M. Manley, R.A. Arndt, Y. Goradia, V.L. Teplitz, Phys. Rev. D 30 (1984) 904-936; \\
585: D.M. Manley, E.M. Saleski, Phys. Rev. D 45 (1992) 4002-4033.
586: \bibitem{Blatt} J. Blatt and V. F. Weisskopf, \textit{Theoretical Nuclear Physics} (Dover,
587: New York, 1991).
588: \bibitem{Davidson01-1} R.M. Davidson, R. Workman,
589: Phys. Rev. C 63 (2001) 025210; \\
590: R.M. Davidson, R. Workman, Phys. Rev. C 63 (2001) 058201.
591: \bibitem{SAID} R.A. Arndt, W.J. Briscoe, I.I. Strakovsky,
592: R.L. Workman, Phys. Rev. C 66 (2002) 055213,
593: SAID database, http://gwdac.phys.gwu.edu
594: \bibitem{NAG} Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd.,
595: Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2-8DR, UK,
596: http://www.nag.co.uk
597: \bibitem{thesis} C. Fern\'andez-Ram\'{\i}rez,
598: \textit{Electromagnetic production
599: of light mesons}, PhD dissertation,
600: Universidad Complutense de Madrid (2006),
601: http://nuclear.fis.ucm.es/research/thesis/cesar\_tesis.pdf
602: \bibitem{eta} C. Fern\'andez-Ram\'{\i}rez,
603: E. Moya de Guerra, J.M. Ud\'{\i}as, in preparation.
604: \bibitem{ETAMAID} L. Tiator, C. Bennhold, S.S. Kamalov,
605: Nucl. Phys. A 580 (1994) 455-474;
606: W.-T. Ching, S.N. Yang, L. Tiator, D. Drechsel,
607: Nucl. Phys. A 700 (2002) 429-453.
608: \end{thebibliography}
609: \end{document}
610: