1: \documentstyle[12pt,epsf,epsfig,amsmath]{article}
2: \hoffset -0.4in
3: \textwidth 6in
4: \textheight 8.5in
5: %\setcounter{page}{1} `
6: \parskip 7pt \openup1\jot \parindent=0.5in
7: %\topmargin -0.5in
8:
9: % the stuff below defines \eqalign and \eqalignno in such a
10: % way that they will run on Latex
11: % eqalignnoleft is eqalignno positioned flush left on the page
12: \newfont{\thiplo}{msbm10 scaled\magstep 2}
13: \newfont{\gothic}{eufb10 scaled\magstep 2}
14: \newfont{\unc}{eurb10}
15: \newskip\humongous \humongous=0pt plus 1000pt minus 1000pt
16: \def\caja{\mathsurround=0pt}\def\eqalign#1{\,\vcenter{\openup1\jot \caja
17: \ialign{\strut \hfil$\displaystyle{##}$&$
18: \displaystyle{{}##}$\hfil\crcr#1\crcr}}\,}
19: \newif\ifdtup
20: \def\panorama{\global\dtuptrue \openup1\jot \caja
21: \everycr{\noalign{\ifdtup \global\dtupfalse
22: \vskip-\lineskiplimit \vskip\normallineskiplimit
23: \else \penalty\interdisplaylinepenalty \fi}}}
24: \def\eqalignno#1{\panorama \tabskip=\humongous
25: \halign to\displaywidth{\hfil$\displaystyle{##}$
26: \tabskip=0pt&$\displaystyle{{}##}$\hfil
27: \tabskip=\humongous&\llap{$##$}\tabskip=0pt
28: \crcr#1\crcr}}\def\eqalignnoleft#1{\panorama \tabskip=0pt
29: \halign to\displaywidth{\hfil$\displaystyle{##}$
30: \tabskip=0pt&$\displaystyle{{}##}$\hfil
31: \tabskip=\humongous&\llap{$##$}\tabskip=0pt
32: \crcr#1\crcr}}
33: % \eqright causes display equation material between \eqright and \cr
34: % to be positioned flush right on the page. This is useful
35: % in breaking long lines in a display equation.
36: % \eqright is usually used in conjunction with \eqalignnoleft.
37: \def\eqright #1\cr{\noalign{\hfill$\displaystyle{{}#1}$}}
38: % \eqleft causes display equation material between \eqleft and \cr
39: % to be positioned flush left on the page.
40: \def\eqleft #1\cr{\noalign{\noindent$\displaystyle{{}#1}$\hfill}}
41: % The oldref and fig macros are for formatting
42: % references and figure lists at the end of the paper.
43: % If you type \oldref{1}Dirac, P.A.M. you will get
44: % [1] Dirac, P.A.M.
45: % Same goes for \fig except you get Figure 2.1
46: \def\oldrefledge{\hangindent3\parindent}
47: \def\oldreffmt#1{\rlap{[#1]} \hbox to 2\parindent{}}
48: \def\oldref#1{\par\noindent\oldrefledge \oldreffmt{#1}
49: \ignorespaces}
50: \def\figledge{\hangindent=1.25in}
51: \def\figfmt#1{\rlap{Figure {#1}} \hbox to 1in{}}
52: \def\fig#1{\par\noindent\figledge \figfmt{#1}
53: \ignorespaces}
54: %
55: % This defines et al., i.e., e.g., cf., etc.
56: \def\ie{\hbox{\it i.e.}{}} \def\etc{\hbox{\it etc.}{}}
57: \def\eg{\hbox{\it e.g.}{}} \def\cf{\hbox{\it cf.}{}}
58: \def\etal{\hbox{\it et al.}}
59: \def\dash{\hbox{---}}
60: % common physics symbols
61: \def\tr{\mathop{\rm tr}}
62: \def\Tr{\mathop{\rm Tr}}
63: \def\partder#1#2{{\partial #1\over\partial #2}}
64: \def\secder#1#2#3{{\partial~2 #1\over\partial #2 \partial #3}}
65: \def\bra#1{\left\langle #1\right|}
66: \def\ket#1{\left| #1\right\rangle}
67: \def\VEV#1{\left\langle #1\right\rangle}
68: \def\ME#1#2{\left\langle #1\right|\left. #2 \right\rangle}
69: \def\gdot#1{\rlap{$#1$}/}
70: \def\abs#1{\left| #1\right|}
71: \def\pr#1{#1~\prime}
72: \def\ltap{\raisebox{-.4ex}{\rlap{$\sim$}} \raisebox{.4ex}{$<$}}
73: \def\gtap{\raisebox{-.4ex}{\rlap{$\sim$}} \raisebox{.4ex}{$>$}}
74: % \contract is a differential geometry contraction sign _|
75: \def\contract{\makebox[1.2em][c]{
76: \mbox{\rule{.6em}{.01truein}\rule{.01truein}{.6em}}}}
77: % The command \sectioneq produces numbering of equations by section
78: \def\holdtheequation{\arabic}
79: \def\sectioneq{\def\theequation{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}{\let
80: \holdsection=\section\def\section{\setcounter{equation}{0}\holdsection}}}%
81:
82: % The commands \beginletts and \endletts delimit sections of
83: % text in which successive equation numbers are distinguished by
84: % sequentially appending lower case letters
85: \newcounter{holdequation}\def
86: \beginletts{\begingroup\setcounter
87: {holdequation}{\value{equation}}\addtocounter
88: {equation}{1}\edef
89: \holdtheequation{\theequation}\setcounter
90: {equation}{0}\def
91: \theequation{\holdtheequation\alph{equation}}}
92: \def\endletts{\endgroup\setcounter
93: {equation}{\value{holdequation}}\refstepcounter{equation}}
94: % The command \num provides automatic numbering in LaTex when used in
95: % place of (equation number) in PlainTeX-style equations
96: \def\num{(\refstepcounter{equation}\theequation)}
97: % \auto is shorthand for \eqno\num
98: \def\auto{\eqno(\refstepcounter{equation}\theequation)}
99: % The commands \begineq and \endeq provide for one vertically
100: % centered automatic number for multiline equations
101: \def\begineq #1\endeq{$$ \refstepcounter{equation}\eqalign{#1}\eqno
102: (\theequation) $$}
103: % The command \contlimit puts (a\rightarrow0)
104: % under \longrightarrow
105: \def\contlimit{\,{\hbox{$\longrightarrow$}\kern-1.8em\lower1ex
106: \hbox{${\scriptstyle (a\rightarrow0)}$}}\,}
107: % The command \centeron#1#2 backs up #2 so that it is centered
108: % over #1. \centerover and \centerunder work like \centeron,
109: % except that they raise or lower #2 to place it over or under
110: % #1.
111: \def\centeron#1#2{{\setbox0=\hbox{#1}\setbox1=\hbox{#2}\ifdim
112: \wd1>\wd0\kern.5\wd1\kern-.5\wd0\fi
113: \copy0\kern-.5\wd0\kern-.5\wd1\copy1\ifdim\wd0>\wd1
114: \kern.5\wd0\kern-.5\wd1\fi}}
115: %
116: \def\centerover#1#2{\centeron{#1}{\setbox0=\hbox{#1}\setbox
117: 1=\hbox{#2}\raise\ht0\hbox{\raise\dp1\hbox{\copy1}}}}
118: %
119: \def\centerunder#1#2{\centeron{#1}{\setbox0=\hbox{#1}\setbox
120: 1=\hbox{#2}\lower\dp0\hbox{\lower\ht1\hbox{\copy1}}}}
121: % The commands \lsim and \gsim provide symbols for
122: % `less than of order' and `greater than of order'
123: \def\lsim{\;\centeron{\raise.35ex\hbox{$<$}}{\lower.65ex\hbox
124: {$\sim$}}\;}
125: \def\gsim{\;\centeron{\raise.35ex\hbox{$>$}}{\lower.65ex\hbox
126: {$\sim$}}\;}
127: % The command \st (for stroke) puts a slash through the succeeding
128: % character in math mode
129: \def\st#1{\centeron{$#1$}{$/$}}
130: % The command \newcases works like \cases except that
131: % the baselines and type size are the same as for
132: % display equations
133: \def\newcases#1{\left\{\,\vcenter{\normalbaselines\openup1\jot \caja
134: \ialign{\strut$\displaystyle{##}$\hfil
135: &\quad##\hfil\crcr#1\crcr}}\right.}
136: % The command \super inserts the characters in its argument as a
137: % superscript with the correct spacefactor.
138: \def\super#1{\ifmmode \hbox{\textsuper{#1}}\else\textsuper{#1}\fi}
139: \def\textsuper#1{\newcount\holdspacefactor\holdspacefactor=\spacefactor
140: $^{#1}$\spacefactor=\holdspacefactor}
141: % The command \supercite redefines \cite so that it makes superscripted
142: % citation numbers. It is to be used in conjunction with the
143: % \label command (for example, with one of the list-making
144: % environments). The command \oldcite restores the original LaTeX
145: % \cite command.
146: \let\holdcite=\cite
147: \def\supercite{\def\cite{\newcite}}
148: \def\oldcite{\def\cite{\holdcite}}
149: \def\newcite#1{\super{\newcount\citenumber\citenumber=0\getcite#1,@, }}
150: \def\getcite#1,{\advance\citenumber by1
151: \def\getcitearg{#1}\def\lastarg{@}
152: \ifnum\citenumber=1
153: \ref{#1}\let\next=\getcite\else\ifx\getcitearg\lastarg\let\next=\relax
154: \else ,\ref{#1}\let\next=\getcite\fi\fi\next}
155: % The command \nskip gives a vertical skip of the specified
156: % dimension (in braces) without including any extra \baselineskip
157: % or \parskip.
158: \def\nskip#1{\vbox{}\vskip-\baselineskip\vskip#1\vskip-\parskip\noindent}
159: % The command \lskip skips vertically by one line, i.e.,
160: % the current \baselineskip. There is no indentation unless
161: % \indent is specified.
162: \def\lskip{\vskip\baselineskip\vskip-\parskip\noindent}
163: \def\np{Nucl.\ Phys.\ }
164: \def\pr{Phys.\ Rev.\ }
165: \def\prl{Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ }
166: \def\pl{Phys.\ Lett.\ }
167: \def\arnps{Ann.\ Rev.\ Nucl.\ Part.\ Sci.\ }
168: \def\mn{\mu\nu}
169: \def\epm{e^+e^-}
170: \def\pom{{\rm P\kern -0.53em\llap I\,}}
171: \def\spom{{\rm P\kern -0.36em\llap \small I\,}}
172: \def\sspom{{\rm P\kern -0.33em\llap \footnotesize I\,}}
173: \def\gev{{\rm GeV}}
174: \def\mev{{\rm MeV}}
175: \def\parens#1{\left(#1\right)}
176: \relax
177: \def\contlimit{\,{\hbox{$\longrightarrow$}\kern-1.8em\lower1ex
178: \hbox{${\scriptstyle (a\rightarrow0)}$}}\,}
179: \def\upon #1/#2 {{\textstyle{#1\over #2}}}
180: \relax
181: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
182: \def\srf#1{$^{#1}$\ }
183: \def\mainhead#1{\setcounter{equation}{0}\addtocounter{section}{1}
184: \vbox{\begin{center}\large\bf #1\end{center}}\nobreak\par}
185: \sectioneq
186: \def\subhead#1{\bigskip\vbox{\noindent\bf #1}\nobreak\par}
187: \def\rf#1#2#3{{\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
188: \def\autolabel#1{\auto\label{#1}}
189: \def\til#1{\centeron{\hbox{$#1$}}{\lower 2ex\hbox{$\char'176$}}}
190: \def\tild#1{\centeron{\hbox{$\,#1$}}{\lower 2.5ex\hbox{$\char'176$}}}
191: \def\sumtil{\centeron{\hbox{$\displaystyle\sum$}}{\lower
192: -1.5ex\hbox{$\widetilde{\phantom{xx}}$}}}
193: \def\sumtilt{\sum^{\raisebox{-.15mm}{\hspace{-1.75mm}$\widetilde{}$}}\ }
194: \def\gltext{$\raisebox{1mm}{\centerunder{$\scriptscriptstyle
195: >$}{$\scriptscriptstyle <$}}$}
196: \def\intcent#1{\centerunder{$\displaystyle\int$}{\raisebox{-2.2mm}{$ #1 $}}}
197: \def\kbar{\underline{k}}
198: \def\qbar{\underline{q}}
199: \def\kbarsl{\underline{\st k}}
200: \def\qbarsl{\underline{\st q}}
201: \def\parens#1{\left(#1\right)}
202: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
203: \def\pbar{\underline{p}}
204: \def\pbarsl{\underline{\st p}}
205: \def\q{\unc q}
206: \def\p{\unc p}
207: \def\f{\footnotesize}
208: \def\n{\normalsize}
209: \def\s{\small}
210: \def\l{\large}
211:
212: %-------------------------------------------------------------------
213:
214: %\pagestyle{empty}
215:
216: \begin{document}
217:
218: \begin{titlepage}
219:
220: \rightline{\vbox{\halign{&#\hfil\cr
221: % &ANL-HEP-CP-04-83\cr
222: &\today\cr}}}
223: \vspace{0.25in}
224:
225: \begin{center}
226:
227: {\large\bf The LHC Pomeron and Unification of the Standard
228: Model\footnote{Presented
229: at the Small-x and Diffraction Workshop, Fermilab,March 2007.}
230: \newline $~$
231: \newline {\it - a Bound-State S-Matrix Within a Fixed-Point Field Theory ?}}
232:
233: \medskip
234:
235:
236:
237: Alan. R. White\footnote{arw@hep.anl.gov }
238:
239: \vskip 0.6cm
240:
241: \centerline{Argonne National Laboratory}
242: \centerline{9700 South Cass, Il 60439, USA.}
243: \vspace{0.5cm}
244:
245: \end{center}
246:
247: \begin{abstract}
248:
249: The Critical Pomeron solution of
250: high-energy unitarity leads to a unique underlying massless field theory
251: that might be the origin of the Standard Model. A
252: color sextet quark sector - producing both
253: electroweak symmetry breaking and dark matter - is added to QCD to saturate
254: asymptotic freedom. The sextet sector is then embedded uniquely in ``QUD'' -
255: an anomaly free,
256: just asymptotically free,
257: massless SU(5) theory with elementary lepton and triplet quark sectors very close
258: to the Standard Model. A multi-regge bound-state S-Matrix is constructed
259: using infra-red divergent scaling reggeon interactions that
260: couple via massless fermion chiral anomalies.
261: Within the QCD sub-sector
262: there is an ``anomalous wee gluon'' critical phenomenon that
263: produces a spectrum with confinement and chiral symmetry breaking.
264: The exponentiation of left-handed gauge boson divergences
265: implies that the full set of composite interactions and
266: the low-mass spectrum of QUD could be just those of the Standard Model.
267: All particles, including neutrinos,
268: appear as massive, Goldstone boson related, bound-states and there is no
269: Higgs field. The different coupling strengths, multiple mass scales,
270: and multigenerational
271: structure should also appear. The Critical Pomeron
272: may be the S-Matrix manifestation of the underlying fixed-point field theory.
273:
274: If QUD underlies the Standard Model as described, the sextet sector should
275: produce new, unmistakeable, large
276: cross-sections at the LHC, for which the pomeron could be the main diagnostic!
277:
278: \end{abstract}
279:
280: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\arabic{footnote}} \end{titlepage}
281:
282: %\setcounter{page}{2}
283:
284: \mainhead{ 1. INTRODUCTION.}
285:
286: To suggest there may be a unique, unitary, particle
287: S-Matrix is very heretical in
288: the current theoretical climate - given the wide variety of field theories and
289: string theories studied. Even so, I will argue that unitarity may be
290: the key to the origin of the Standard Model as a bound-state S-Matrix embedded
291: (without off-shell amplitudes) in an almost conformal massless field theory. This is a
292: radical proposition which
293: the LHC will determine to be either crazy heresy or singularly original insight.
294:
295: To produce a unitary S-Matrix in
296: an asymptotically free gauge theory, large momentum perturbation theory
297: has to match with a high-energy, low transverse momentum, ``non-perturbative''
298: solution of both s and t-channel multiparticle unitarity that produces
299: asymptotically rising cross-sections. This is an extremely strong constraint, the
300: significance of which may not be fully appreciated.
301: As far as is known, the only non-trivial solution of all high-energy unitarity constraints
302: is the Reggeon Field Theory Critical Pomeron\cite{cri}. After a long
303: quest to understand how this solution can be
304: produced by gauge theory reggeon interactions, I have concluded
305: that a unique underlying massless gauge theory is required. Furthermore, special
306: small $\beta$-function properties of this theory allow a high-energy
307: bound-state S-Matrix,
308: dominated by fermion anomalies, to be constructed diagrammatically via
309: multi-regge theory. Remarkably, it seems that the S-Matrix of the
310: full Standard Model could emerge as a generalization of the emergence of
311: the hadron S-Matrix from QCD.
312: The asymptotic scaling of the Critical Pomeron is a reflection of
313: a fixed-point in the underlying field theory. Here are some quotes from the
314: opening paragraphs of a forthcoming paper\cite{amtm}.
315: \begin{center}
316: \parbox{6in}{\openup-1.15\jot{ \it
317: $~~$ ``~In this paper we will discuss a theory, which we refer to as
318: QUD$~^{\#}$, that it appears might provide
319: a complete and self-contained origin for the Standard Model. We will present
320: arguments that SU(5) gauge theory with the
321: left-handed, massless, fermion representation\cite{kw}
322: \centerline{$5\oplus15\oplus40\oplus45^*$}
323: \newline $~$}}
324: \parbox{6in}{\openup-1.15\jot{ \it has a bound-state high-energy S-Matrix which
325: contains only the interactions of the Standard Model and also has,
326: qualitatively at least, the correct low mass spectrum.
327: If the states and high-energy amplitudes are produced by chiral anomaly
328: coupled multi-regge infra-red divergences, as we outline, then
329: all elements of the Standard Model will be present
330: in an extraordinarily economic manner ...}}
331: \parbox{6in}{\openup-1.15\jot{ \it
332: $~~~~$ Although much remains to be done to complete
333: the picture we develop and many of our arguments are speculative it is clear
334: that an essential, but
335: very unconventional, element that is required for the emergence
336: of the Standard Model S-Matrix from QUD is that electroweak symmetry breaking is
337: associated with a new, high mass, sector of the (QCD) strong interaction\cite{arw05,
338: wm,bww}. This new strong sector is predicted\cite{arw05} to
339: produce large cross-section effects at the LHC - in addition to
340: providing a natural explanation for the existence and
341: predominance of dark matter,
342: the cosmic ray spectrum knee, and other cosmic ray phenomena.''
343: \newline $~$
344: \newline $^{\#}$\hbox{\small Quantum
345: Uno/Unification/Unitary/Underlying Dynamics $~$ \hspace{1.3in} $~$}}}
346: \end{center}
347:
348: \noindent The discovery of QUD at the LHC would have a
349: revolutionary effect on the field !!
350:
351: \noindent {\bf Experimentally,} the new physics
352: involves large cross-section phenomena very different from
353: common expectations for physics ``beyond the Standard Model''.
354: \begin{itemize}
355: \item{The new phenomena include the strong interaction
356: production of both electroweak vector bosons and dark matter
357: candidate ``neutrons'' composed of color sextet quarks.
358: These cross-sections will be enhanced by
359: large (sextet quark) color factors. Sextet neutrons will be stable and their
360: (QCD) self-interaction will also be
361: very strong, but with the short-range of the electroweak interaction -
362: consistent with properties, currently, anticipated for dark matter.}
363: \item{The ILC would be completely wrong - as the next machine.
364: A higher-energy SSC would be the obvious choice, preferably with
365: help from an e-p machine.}
366: \end{itemize}
367: {\bf Theoretically, } QUD
368: also has very unexpected and unconventional properties.
369: \begin{itemize}
370: \item{As a field theory, it is massless and
371: almost conformally invariant. An infra-red fixed-point
372: keeps the gauge coupling very small ($\alpha_u
373: \raisebox{0.5mm}{${\scriptstyle ~<<~}$}$1/50)
374: - providing
375: a potential explanation for small neutrino masses.}
376: \end{itemize}
377: At first sight QUD is an ``unparticle''\cite{hg} theory
378: that, it would be expected\cite{asv}, can not have a non-perturbative particle spectrum
379: because of the infra-red scale invariance of off-shell Green's functions.
380: Our expectation is, however, that the full field theory is defined only perturbatively
381: (as a large momentum expansion), with no well-defined non-perturbative
382: Green's functions, and in a major break with the current theoretical
383: paradigm, we expect the physical states and interactions to appear only in the S-Matrix.
384: Infra-red scale invariance is then manifest in the chiral anomaly coupled
385: wee gluon reggeon interactions that dominate the dynamics
386: producing a multi-regge bound-state S-Matrix. Amongst the significant properties
387: that emerge are
388: \begin{enumerate}
389: \item{Anomaly domination of wee gluon reggeon interactions implies that
390: only a very small subset of the field theory degrees of freedom contribute to the
391: S-Matrix.}
392: \item{An ``anomalous wee gluon'' critical phenomenon occurs in which,
393: because of the conjugacy properties of the fermions, only Standard Model
394: interactions survive.}
395: \item{All particles are, Goldstone boson related, bound-states with
396: masses generated by reggeization, mixing, and anomaly interactions
397: {\bf - there is no Higgs field.}}
398: \end{enumerate}
399:
400: It is well-known that, at infinite momentum, ``universal wee partons'' could, potentially,
401: play the role of a vacuum and that this is probably a necessity for a full parton
402: model to be valid in QCD. In fact, we are able to access
403: ``non-perturbative'' physics in the multi-regge
404: region just because, in effect, infinite momentum frame kinematics are
405: introduced for all states and interactions. (As a result, our description of the
406: properties of states can be quite different from, although it must be consistent
407: with, descriptions at finite momentum.) By using the power of the multi-regge theory
408: that we have developed, we are then able to construct bound-state amplitudes in terms
409: of reggeon diagrams. Previously we have shown\cite{arw05} that in
410: massless QCD$_S$, a QCD sub-sector of QUD, the chiral anomaly dynamics produces
411: an anomalous wee gluon ``vacuum'' component of
412: both the pomeron (which is critical) and all bound-states. Although there are
413: important distinctive properties relative to conventional QCD, as far as we know,
414: our results are consistent with all the (experimentally established)
415: properties of QCD below the electroweak scale.
416: A crucial distinction is, however,
417: the limitation on the spectrum of states compared
418: to what would be anticipated from just color confinement and chiral
419: symmetry breaking. The spectrum we obtain, particularly
420: the absence of glueballs , is more consistent with experiment than
421: conventional QCD expectations, as is the absence of the BFKL pomeron.
422:
423: In the following, we will outline arguments that the chiral anomaly dynamics
424: responsible for our solution of QCD$_S$, produces in QUD just the
425: interactions and bound-states of the Standard Model. As will become apparent,
426: unfortunately, although we are able to describe qualitatively how the dynamics
427: operates and how states and amplitudes are obtained, there is still much that needs to
428: be done to indentify physical scales and even to determine how many parameters are
429: actually involved in the constructions we describe.
430:
431: We build up the high-energy behavior of both QCD$_S$ and QUD by starting in a
432: supercritical pomeron (color superconducting) phase in
433: which the gauge symmetry is partially broken. A resulting
434: anomalous gluon infra-red divergence produces a wee gluon condensate
435: and directly determines
436: the physical amplitudes, with the physical states being anomaly-pole chiral
437: Goldstone bosons. Higher-order contributions of chirality
438: transition vertices can then be built up perturbatively.
439: Restoration of the full color symmetry produces critical behavior
440: in which the production and absorption of anomalous wee gluons becomes a dynamical
441: collective phenomenon.
442:
443: The vertices that couple anomalous wee gluons contain
444: both a chirality transition and an on-shell longitudinal gluon interaction.
445: This interaction is present in the color superconducting phase and can be present
446: in the unbroken theory via the Gribov (light-cone) quantization ambiguity.
447: Physically, the anomaly vertices
448: describe the production of a fermion pair, one of which is a zero
449: momentum hole state which becomes physical
450: via compensating wee gluon emission.
451: Viewing the wee gluon emission as resulting from an initial
452: displacement of the Dirac sea, we can identify
453: this ``Fermi surface fluctuation'' as the order parameter of the pomeron phase-transition.
454: In the supercritical phase it is a correlated
455: ``reggeon condensate'' that, in our construction, is
456: introduced by the color symmetry breaking.
457: At the critical point the Fermi surface fluctuations
458: are dynamical and uncorrelated (locally random within the color group), but produce
459: long-range correlations as a collective phenomenon. In QUD,
460: the Fermi surface anomalous wee gluon emission (and Critical Pomeron behaviour)
461: is limited to a non-abelian subgroup with vector-like
462: couplings to the sea. Because QUD
463: is vector-like with respect to an SU(3)xU(1) subgroup only,
464: the parity conserving SU(3) color strong interaction emerges.
465:
466: We will see that QUD is an extraordinarily minimal extension of the Standard
467: Model in that almost
468: all of the elements that are clearly ``Beyond the Standard Model'' have an essential
469: dynamical role. There is
470: a sextet quark sector that, as we have emphasized, produces
471: both electroweak symmetry breaking and dark matter. There is also
472: an octet quark sector that has lepton electroweak quantum numbers. As
473: a real SU(3) representation, the octet quarks play a crucial role
474: in allowing leptons to be SU(5) invariant, while having no strong interaction.
475: The octet sector also appears to be
476: responsible for the emergence of the Standard Model generation structure.
477:
478: \mainhead{2. COSMIC RAY AND TEVATRON EVIDENCE}
479:
480: There is already substantial evidence in cosmic ray physics that there could be a
481: major strong interaction change in the energy range between the Tevatron
482: and the LHC. In Fig.~1 we show the well-known knee in the
483: cosmic ray spectrum.
484: It is a remarkable, very well-established, phenomenon that occurs between
485: Tevatron and LHC energies. The associated break in
486: the slope stands out, distinctively, as the
487: energy increases over some ten orders of magnitude and the flux decreases
488: by thirty orders of magnitude.
489: Although it is generally believed to be due to
490: a (so far not understood) conspiracy of
491: external phenomena, a change in the atmosheric interaction seems far more plausible.
492: From it's earliest discovery, it was
493: suggested\cite{nik} that the knee could be a threshold for
494: production of
495: neutral particles not observed in the ground level detectors.
496: The resulting underestimation of the shower energy
497: would lead to a pile-up of events that would be
498: observed as a ``knee''. However,
499: a major part of the cross-section has to be involved and there was no credible
500: proposal as to what the neutral particles could be.
501:
502: The energy scale for the sextet sector is the electroweak scale and
503: sextet cross-sections should be larger than triplet cross-sections because of color
504: factors. However,
505: the effective energy threshold for production of the sextet sector is determined by
506: inclusive pomeron exchange, since this is the only large cross-section mechanism for
507: sextet states to be produced by triplet states. According to current
508: diffractive phenomenology, the onset of inclusive pomeron production of
509: electroweak scale states should be around
510: the energy of the knee. Three effects that will contribute to the formation of a knee
511: are
512: \newline $~$
513: \newline
514: \parbox{3.1in}{\epsfxsize=3in
515: \epsffile{eng3.ps}
516: \centerline{(a)}}
517: \hspace{0.1in}
518: \parbox{2.3in}{
519: \epsfxsize=2.2in
520: \epsffile{crk31.ps}
521: \centerline{(b)}
522: \epsfxsize=2.2in
523: \epsffile{crk51.ps}
524: \centerline{(c)}}
525: \begin{center}
526: Figure 1.
527: The knee (a) all data (b) less data (c) with the slope extracted.
528: \end{center}
529: \begin{enumerate}
530: \item{Prolific production of vector bosons
531: will increase the average transverse momentum enormously and will also
532: increase the relative neutrino production. Energies will
533: be seriously underestimated by the unexpected shower spread and increased neutral
534: component. }
535: \item{Dark matter (sextet neutron) production, and the resultant energy underestimation,
536: will increase rapidly with
537: energy. This is close to the original explanation
538: of the knee as due to the production of neutrals. Of course,
539: dark matter was unknown and the link with the knee, that I am proposing,
540: could not have been imagined.}
541: \item{Sextet neutron dark matter should be a major component of incoming cosmic rays. Since
542: the pomeron again has to be involved, the atmospheric interaction will have
543: a threshold energy that is
544: not far below the normal matter sextet threshold energy and, once underway, will share
545: properties 1. and 2.}
546: \end{enumerate}
547: Probably, the observed knee can only be reproduced if
548: this last effect (which will produce a direct ``bump'' in the spectrum)
549: is a significant part of it's formation.
550: Unfortunately, we have ignored this effect
551: in our previous discussions. Consequently, using the knee events as a basis, our estimates
552: of the needed magnitudes for the first two effects, and the corresponding LHC
553: cross-sections, were dramatically large and, perhaps,
554: impossible to reproduce theoretically. With the third effect included, the knee seems
555: relatively straightforward to reproduce. The expected
556: new LHC cross-sections must still be large, strong
557: interaction, effects. However, they may not be quite as ``dramatic'' as we have
558: previously emphasized.
559:
560: There are a large number of other new phenomena seen in cosmic ray showers
561: with energies above the knee. In Fig.~2 we show one of the most interesting\cite{cores},
562: involving the production (essentially) of high $E_T$ jet pairs.
563: A QCD Monte Carlo
564: tuned to jet data at collider energies fails to reproduce the data
565: above the knee, by orders of magnitude, as would be expected if the sextet sector
566: is produced.
567: \begin{center}
568: \epsfxsize=2.9in
569: \epsffile{sp31.ps}
570:
571: Figure 2 Dijet production
572: \end{center}
573: There are also indications from the
574: Tevatron that there will be a strong interaction change at higher energies.
575: We discuss two phenomena,
576: illustrated in Fig.~3,
577: \begin{center}
578:
579: \epsfxsize=3in
580: \epsffile{CDF11.ps}
581: \hspace{0.3in}
582: \epsfxsize=2.4in
583: \epsffile{fs3.ps}
584:
585: (a) \hspace{3in} (b)
586:
587: Figure 3(a) The Inclusive Jet Cross-Section (b) Evolution of $\alpha_s$
588:
589: \end{center}
590: which both suggest that new QCD physics enters above
591: the top mass scale.
592: In Fig.~3(a) we show the Run 2 inclusive jet cross-section\cite{CDFb}
593: obtained using a cone algorithm. Naively, the data
594: pull away from the theory from $E_T \sim m_t$ upwards, indicating that
595: QCD jet physics above the electroweak scale
596: may be breaking down in just the manner
597: that we would expect, as the sextet sector enters the theory.
598:
599: In Fig.~3(b) we show the measured evolution\cite{CDF} of $\alpha_s$. The inclusion of
600: a sextet quark doublet in the
601: QCD $\beta$-function would halt the evolution of $\alpha_s$,
602: just as appears to be happening
603: at $E_T \sim m_t$. That this is the right sextet scale can be argued by
604: noting that $E_T \sim m_t$ is also $E_T \sim 2 M_W$. Alternatively,
605: as discussed at more length in \cite{arw05}, it could
606: well be that top production is due to a resonance (the $\eta_6$) that is the sextet
607: sector analog of the Higgs particle. This would imply that the top quark mass is actually
608: the sextet constituent mass scale, and it would be expected that deviations from
609: conventional QCD would start above this scale.
610:
611: \mainhead{3. THE PATH TO CONFINING QUD}
612:
613: The logical steps that lead, uniquely, to QUD can be summarized
614: as follows. They will
615: be discussed in much more detail in \cite{amtm}.
616: \begin{enumerate}
617: \item{The Critical Pomeron, obtained\cite{cri} as a renormalization group solution of
618: Reggeon Field Theory (RFT), is the only known
619: solution\cite{mm}
620: of full multiparticle unitarity - in both the $t$ and $s$ channels - that gives
621: asymptotically rising cross-sections.}
622: \item{Supercritical RFT matches\cite{arw05}
623: with color superconducting QCD. That hadrons must also have
624: supercritical properties\cite{arw05} is achieved, as we will see, by
625: ``anomalous wee gluons'' appearing in both hadrons and the pomeron. The matching
626: with supercritical RFT, shows that the Critical Pomeron occurs in QCD
627: when asymptotic freedom is ``saturated''.
628: The only realistic quark content is six color triplets
629: plus two color sextets, giving\cite{arw84} what we refer to as ``QCD$_S$''}
630: \item{If the sextet quarks have the right electroweak quantum numbers,
631: the ``sextet pion'' sector will produce electroweak symmetry breaking
632: - without any new interaction. The electroweak scale will be the QCD
633: sextet chiral scale, which Casimir scaling implies\cite{arw05,wm}
634: is the right order of magnitude.}
635: \item{To cancel the electroweak
636: anomaly and to generate particle masses, the sextet sector should
637: be embedded in a left-handed unified theory.}
638: \item{Asking for the sextet sector, plus asymptotic freedom, plus anomaly cancelation,
639: uniquely\cite{kw} selects QUD, i.e. SU(5) gauge theory
640: with the left-handed fermion representation
641: \newline \centerline{\bf $~~5\oplus15\oplus40\oplus45^*~~~~~~~~~~$}}
642: \end{enumerate}
643:
644: Amazingly, the triplet quark and lepton sectors of QUD,
645: although they were not asked for, are very close to the Standard Model !!
646: There are three ``generations'' of
647: quarks and antiquarks with charges $~\pm 2/3,~ \pm 1/3~$, (implying that
648: QUD contains QCD$_S$) and there are also three ``generations'' of leptons.
649: The $SU(3)\otimes SU(2)\otimes U(1)~$ decomposition of QUD is
650: {\small
651: $$
652: \eqalign{5~&=(3,1,-\frac{1}{3}))^{ \{3\}}
653: +(1,2,\frac{1}{2}))^{ \{2\}}~,\cr
654: 15~&=(1,3,1)~+~(3,2,\frac{1}{6})^{ \{1\}}+
655: {\bf (6,1,-\frac{2}{3})}~,\cr
656: 40~&=(1,2,-\frac{3}{2})^{ \{3\}}
657: +(3,2,\frac{1}{6})^{ \{2\}}+
658: (3^*,1,-\frac{2}{3})+(3^*,3,-\frac{2}{3})+
659: {\bf (6^*,2,\frac{1}{6})}+(8,1,1)~,\cr
660: 45^*&=(1,2,-\frac{1}{2})^{ \{1\}}+(3^*,1,\frac{1}{3})
661: +(3^*,3,\frac{1}{3})+(3,1,-\frac{4}{3})
662: +(3,2,\frac{7}{6})^{ \{3\}}+
663: {\bf (6,1,\frac{1}{3})} +(8,2,-\frac{1}{2})}
664: $$}
665: The ``Standard Model'' quark and lepton generations, denoted by superscripts
666: $~\{1\},~\{2\}$, and $\{3\}$,
667: are scattered amongst the separate SU(5) representations.
668: Clearly, the SU(2)xU(1) quantum numbers are not quite right
669: when compared directly with the Standard Model. For a long time this seemed to be
670: an insuperable problem for relating QUD to the Standard Model via any standard
671: (or non-standard) Higgs' mechanism.
672: Note that QUD is real, i.e. is a vector theory,
673: with respect to SU(3)xU(1)$_{em}$.
674:
675: Eventually, I realized that QUD should be considered directly as a
676: confining theory, without any additional symmetry breaking mechanism,
677: and that this is how it can compare
678: with the Standard Model. In the QUD S-Matrix SU(5) color is confined,
679: not just SU(3) color, and so
680: all elementary gauge bosons and fermions are confined and massless.
681: For the Standard Model to emerge, it must have
682: the same relationship to QUD that the hadronic sector has to QCD !!!
683: All hadrons and leptons have to be QUD bound-states and, also,
684: all Standard Model interactions have to be composite.
685:
686: That confining QUD might give the Standard Model
687: S-Matrix became apparent to me only after I understood\cite{arw05}
688: the dynamics of high-energy massless QCD$_S$ in which, as we have
689: described in the Introduction, the S-Matrix is dominated by
690: anomaly vertices containing zero momentum fermion chirality transitions.
691: The chirality transitions play a similar role to condensates - but only in the S-Matrix~!!
692: In our multi-regge construction of amplitudes they appear
693: as relic effects in anomalous reggeon vertices when initial mass generating
694: scalar fields are decoupled. (The description of the
695: dynamics that we give will make it clear why the
696: chirality transitions contribute only in scattering processes involving
697: asymptotic states.)
698: In massless QCD$_S$, because it is a vector theory that conserves parity, the chirality
699: transitions lead only to chiral
700: symmetry breaking and color parity breaking by the pomeron.
701: Correspondingly, it is because QUD is vector-like only with respect to
702: an SU(3)xU(1) subgroup
703: that the chirality transition anomaly vertices naturally select the interactions
704: of the Standard Model.
705:
706: The only elements of the QUD fermion representation
707: that are clearly ``Beyond the Standard Model'' are the following.
708: \begin{enumerate}
709: \item{The sextet quark sector, as we have already
710: talked about, produces both electroweak symmetry breaking and dark matter.}
711: \item{The octet quark sector has lepton electroweak quantum numbers. Because they carry
712: a real SU(3) representation, the octets
713: can not form physical states as chiral Goldston bosons.
714: As a result, they play a very different dynamical role to the triplet and sextet quarks.
715: As we will see, they are nevertheless crucial
716: in allowing leptons to be SU(5) invariant and in
717: producing the correct generation structure of the Standard Model.}
718: \item{We will not find a role for a
719: pair of exotically charged triplet quarks.}
720: \end{enumerate}
721:
722: \mainhead{4. MULTI-REGGE REGGEON AMPLITUDES}
723:
724: The analytic multi-regge theory that we have developed over the years\cite{arw98}
725: provides a very powerful tool for the construction of
726: bound-state scattering amplitudes.
727: For example, the amplitude for bound-state regge pole pions to scatter via pomeron
728: exchange should be contained in a di-triple-regge amplitude, as illustrated in Fig.~4.
729: \begin{center}
730: \epsfxsize=2.5in
731: \epsffile{fs1.ps}
732:
733: Figure 4. A di-triple-regge amplitude.
734: \end{center}
735: (It will be clear later why we have chosen the
736: external scattering states to be vector bosons.)
737: Kinematic descriptions of multi-regge limits can be found in various
738: references\cite{arw98} and we will not give them here. Suffice it to say that
739: each circle vertex in Fig.~4 is separated from adjacent vertices
740: by a large longitudinal momentum, in various space directions, in such a way that
741: a regge exchange contributes to each leg of the diagram. (As we noted in the Introduction,
742: this implies that both bound states and interactions can be viewed as infinite
743: momentum states that, as we will see, have a ``wee parton'' component that
744: has a vacuum-like role.) Here
745: we will concentrate on the procedure for obtaining an
746: amplitude of the form of Fig.~4
747: from QCD$_S$ and QUD reggeon diagrams.
748: What we describe will be just an outline. More details will be given in \cite{amtm}.
749: We anticipate that, if QUD is discovered, the use of reggeon diagrams to calculate
750: bound-state amplitudes will become a major technology and what we describe would be just
751: the beginning of what would become the central calculational procedure.
752:
753: The multi-regge region is where the abstract
754: properties of the S-Matrix are the most powerful\cite{arw98,arw00}.
755: In this kinematic regime, S-Matrix amplitudes
756: have a simple analytic structure and the physical region
757: discontinuity formulae needed to write multiple dispersion relations have been
758: established. As a consequence, multiparticle complex angular momentum theory
759: has been put on a firm foundation and,
760: most importantly, the multi-regge S-Matrix has been shown\cite{arw98} to be
761: controled by ``reggeon unitarity'' equations
762: formulated directly in the angular momentum plane. These equations are
763: discontinuity formulae for all the singularities that control multi-regge asymptotic
764: behavior. Before QCD, these equations were used to formulate Reggeon Field Theory
765: as an effective lagrangian formalism which perturbatively solves the unitarity
766: equations. A renormalization group formalism was then introduced and the Critical
767: Pomeron obtained\cite{cri} as a fixed-point solution.
768: That the reggeon unitarity equations are satisfied by the abstract, but
769: calculable, RFT Critical Pomeron can be regarded as
770: the pinnacle achievement, so far at least, of abstract S-Matrix Theory.
771:
772: Reggeon unitarity is also satisfied, perturbatively, by all existing calculations
773: of gauge theory regge behavior.
774: The leading multi-regge behavior of a feynman diagram is typically obtained
775: by routing the large external light-cone momenta
776: through the diagram so that the
777: maximal number of particles are close to mass-shell and have
778: large, relative, longitudinal momentum separations.
779: After longitudinal integrations are carried out, the result is a transverse momentum
780: diagram (integral) multiplied by logarithms of invariant energies.
781: In a non-abelian gauge theory, all the transverse
782: momentum diagrams generated perturbatively can be organized\cite{bs} into
783: gluon and quark reggeon diagrams.
784: Reggeon diagrams are transverse momentum diagrams
785: with additional reggeon propagators (in either complex angular momentum
786: or rapidity space) that
787: reproduce the energy logarithms while simultaneously satisfying reggeon unitarity.
788:
789: As far as is known, when all the reggeons are massive, reggeon diagrams
790: provide a complete, perturbative, description of a
791: spontaneously broken gauge theory in all multi-regge limits. In particular,
792: this is the case
793: when the gauge symmetry is completely broken by the Higgs mechanism.
794: The reggeon diagrams are gauge
795: invariant but both the reggeized gauge bosons and
796: the reggeized fermions carry their original gauge theory representations as global
797: representations of the gauge group.
798: In general, Higgs scalars do not reggeize and so (before the Higgs scalars
799: are decoupled) multi-regge theory is applicable only to the leading high-energy
800: behavior which originates from the vector bosons and fermions.
801:
802: To obtain the bound-state amplitude of Fig.~4 it is necessary, a priori, to
803: consider all multi-regge reggeon diagrams of the general form illustrated
804: in Fig.~5, and a lot more as well. At first sight, this an impossibly
805: difficult task.
806: \begin{center}
807: \epsfxsize=4.5in
808: \epsffile{fs14.ps}
809:
810: Figure 5. A di-triple-regge reggeon diagram amplitude.
811: \end{center}
812: Fortunately, the problem
813: can be brought under control as follows. Reggeon unitarity
814: determines\cite{arw98} that
815: the kinematic structure and interactions in each t-channel
816: are the same as in well-known elastic scattering diagrams. Only
817: the interactions coupling the separate t-channels (the largest circles in Fig.~5)
818: are more complicated. As a result, we can discuss
819: the infra-red divergences that occur when the reggeons are massless in general terms before
820: considering the specific, very complicated, diagrams. We can then show that the
821: divergences leave only a much smaller set of diagrams, with very special properties.
822: Most importantly, in all the surviving diagrams, the largest circle amplitudes
823: in Fig.~5 contain the anomaly
824: vertices that we alluded to in the Introduction and describe further
825: in the next Section.
826:
827: To obtain our starting point of massive gauge boson
828: and fermion reggeons we use fundamental representation scalar fields.
829: According to complimentarity\cite{fs}, this
830: ensures a smooth restoration of the underlying gauge symmetry when there is
831: a $k_{\perp}$ cut-off in place.
832: (Note that it is the properties of reggeon diagrams in
833: the $k_{\perp}$ infra-red region that are important for our purposes,
834: in contrast to the large $k_{\perp}$ significance\cite{fl} of such diagrams
835: in BFKL physics.) The problem then is
836: to understand how, and in what circumstances,
837: can the massive reggeon diagram solution of
838: reggeon unitarity, that perturbatively describes
839: a spontaneously broken gauge theory, convert to a bound-state and pomeron diagram
840: description containing amplitudes of the form of Fig.~4,
841: as the gauge symmetry is restored. Most importantly, of course,
842: we want to understand the circumstances that will give the Critical Pomeron.
843: We expect that the emergence of Critical Behavior will be very important in allowing
844: the decoupling mass and cut-off scales, that we start with, to be replaced by the
845: scales of the massless theory.
846:
847: \mainhead{5. INFRA-RED DIVERGENCES AND ANOMALIES}
848:
849: To give a general idea of what all the contributing factors are, we will keep
850: the following description of our infra-red divergence analysis very qualitative.
851: The technical details will be described in much more detail in \cite{amtm}.
852:
853: It is well-known that the massless limit produces exponentiating infra-red
854: divergences, associated with reggeization, that
855: ``confine'' the global color in the sense that only
856: reggeon diagrams containing color zero combinations of reggeons survive.
857: However, this is not real confinement in that color zero multi-gluon singularities remain.
858: In our procedure we carry out the ``confinement'' of (global) color in stages.
859: We impose a $k_{\perp}$ cut-off until the last stage when, as we
860: discuss in the following Section,
861: an asymptotically-free scalar field can be used. A major consequence of
862: the cut-off is that fermion loop reggeon interactions
863: do not have Ward identity zeroes at $k_{\perp} =0$ and, as a result,
864: additional infra-red divergences appear. Almost all of the additional divergences
865: exponentiate and so, because of the cut-off,
866: a much larger part of the theory, beyond just the color non-zero
867: sectors, is removed. As we will see, there is a dominant surviving divergence,
868: due to the fermion anomaly vertices that we discuss next,
869: that does not exponentiate. Because this divergence does produce genuine
870: confinement we will be able to simply refer to a massless limit
871: that restores a global color symmetry as confining that symmetry.
872:
873: Reggeon interaction vertices that contain anomalies couple
874: ``anomalous gluons''. As we will
875: define explicitly in Section 7, ``anomalous gluons'
876: are combinations of gluon reggeons that are
877: reggeon generalizations of the well-known anomaly current.
878: The anomalies appear in effective triangle diagrams that
879: are produced when fermions in large loops are placed on-shell by a multi-regge limit.
880: Because multi-regge limits are defined for on mass-shell amplitudes, the
881: anomalies that are generated are a strictly S-Matrix phenomenon.
882: Examples of anomaly vertices (derived in my papers) are shown in Fig.~6.
883:
884: The first vertex shown appears in the coupling of a scattering vector boson
885: to the combination of fermions and anomalous gluons that becomes
886: a regge pole pion as we describe below. As is also illustrated, in this vertex
887: an (on-shell) longitudinal vector interaction plays an essential
888: role in producing the effective triangle diagram. This is one major reason
889: why starting with
890: massive reggeons is a necessary part of producing the anomaly vertices.
891: Because anomalies require three-dimensional kinematics they
892: can only occur in vertices coupling external states or in vertices coupling
893: distinct reggeon t-channels. Therefore, they can appear in the vertices
894: represented by circles in Fig.~4 and by the largest circles in Fig.~5, but they
895: can not occur within the self-interactions of a multi-reggeon configuration
896: forming a single t-channel reggeon state (i.e. the pion and pomeron in Figs.~4 and 5).
897:
898: A further property of an
899: anomaly vertex, that has a deep significance for our construction of bound-state
900: amplitudes, is also illustrated in the first vertex of Fig.~6.
901: An ``anomaly pole'' is generated\cite{arw02}
902: when the anomalous gluons involved carry $k_{\perp} = 0$.
903: As illustrated, production
904: of the pole involves a zero momentum chirality transition, that would be the
905: zero-momentum contribution of a propagator
906: to a condensate. The presence of such chirality
907: transitions is another consequence of starting with
908: masses for all fermions and gauge bosons that is also
909: crucial for the generation of anomalies.
910: The chirality
911: transitions are effects of the initial masses which remain in the anomaly vertices
912: after the masses are sent to zero. We emphasize that the masses decouple
913: straightforwardly in all non-anomaly reggeon interactions and therefore
914: the associated large $k_{\perp}$ perturbation theory is given by the massless theory.
915:
916: \begin{center}
917: \epsfxsize=5.8in
918: \epsffile{fs7.ps}
919: \newline$~$
920: \newline \epsfxsize=5.5in
921: \epsffile{fs5.ps}
922: \newline $~$
923: \newline \epsfxsize=1.6in
924: \epsffile{fs2.ps}
925: \hspace{0.2in}
926: \epsfxsize=4.1in
927: \epsffile{fs6.ps}
928:
929: Figure 6. Anomaly Vertices
930: \end{center}
931:
932: In a flavor channel, the presence
933: of the chirality transition breaks a chiral symmetry that would otherwise be present
934: in the massless theory and, in so doing, produces
935: an anomaly pole that is a Goldstone Boson particle pole. As we will see below,
936: this is how multi-regge bound-states are produced.
937: We can regard an anomaly pole Goldstone boson as the quark/antiquark state that is
938: initially produced within the corresponding
939: triangle diagram. In this case,
940: either the quark or the antiquark has to be in a zero momentum
941: ``negative energy'' state. Alternatively, we can regard the Goldstone boson
942: as the produced combination
943: of a ``normal'' quark/antiquark state together with $k_{\perp} =0$ anomalous gluons.
944: The ``semi-classical'' gluon field can be viewed as compensating for the chirality
945: transition of the zero momentum quark or anti-quark. Equivalently, we can say that,
946: in the process of creating the particle state,
947: there is a shift of the Dirac sea Fermi surface in that a
948: negative energy hole state becomes physical via the introduction of a compensating
949: ``wee gluon'' state.
950:
951: In the pion/pion/pomeron and triple pomeron vertices
952: appearing in Fig.~5, the anomaly pole appears
953: in a U(1) channel involving only gluons. In this case, the anomaly
954: pole acts as a $k_{\perp}$ conserving $\delta$-function
955: that crucially connects scaling divergences in separate channels.
956: Again we can say that the anomaly pole is created by
957: a shift of the Fermi surface in which a
958: negative energy hole state becomes physical via the introduction of a compensating
959: ``wee gluon'' state.
960:
961: \mainhead{6. THE SMALL $\beta$-FUNCTION AND COLOR SUPERCONDUCTIVITY}
962:
963: QUD and massless QCD$_S$ share three, closely related, small $\beta$-function
964: properties that are very important
965: for the construction of multi-regge amplitudes.
966: \begin{enumerate}
967: \item{The asymptotic freedom constraint is saturated\cite{kw}.}
968: \item{An infra-red fixed-point keeps the $\beta$-function small\cite{bz}
969: and also produces reggeon kernels that scale canonically in the $k_{\perp}$ infra-red
970: region.}
971: \item{An asymptotically free fundamental representation scalar field can
972: be used\cite{gw,cel} in both QCD$_S$ - to break
973: SU(3) color to SU(2) to give CSQCD$_S$ (``color superconducting QCD$_S$''), and in
974: QUD - to break SU(5) color to SU(4) to give CSQUD (``color superconducting QUD'').}
975: \end{enumerate}
976: Because of these three properties, the multi-regge reggeon diagrams of
977: CSQCD$_S$ and CSQUD can be used to obtain the corresponding
978: QCD$_S~$ and QUD amplitudes, respectively.
979: (As we will discuss a little more later, a major virtue
980: of this construction procedure is that the
981: anomaly interactions that are introduced, effectively, provide
982: a resolution of the Gribov ambiguity in light-cone quantization of the unbroken
983: theory.) The scaling reggeon kernels play an essential role in the occurrence of
984: anomaly-coupled infra-red divergences that produce physical amplitudes, while
985: the absence of a cut-off as the full color group is confined is essential for the
986: development of the Critical Pomeron reggeon critical phenomenon.
987:
988: We will first discuss SU(2) confinement, which is essentially the same in both
989: QCD$_S$ and QUD. We will then
990: specifically discuss massless QCD$_S$ and afterwards turn to QUD. However,
991: we will see that massless QCD$_S$ contains
992: a large array of massless Goldstone boson states that probably jeopardize the actual
993: existence of the S-Matrix. The only possibility (that we know of) to add masses
994: to the massless states of QCD$_S$, while preserving the dynamics,
995: is to embed the theory in QUD.
996: According to our arguments, QUD has no massless particles
997: and so there should be no threat to the (perhaps unique) existence of the S-Matrix.
998:
999: \mainhead{7. SU(2) CONFINEMENT}
1000:
1001: In the limit giving SU(2) color confinement, a central role is played by
1002: color zero ($I=0~~$) combinations of gluon reggeons that we call ``anomalous gluons''.
1003: These are sets of gluon reggeons that carry color charge parity C not equal to their
1004: signature $\tau$. The ``analytic'' definition of signature for a reggeon state
1005: is (for vector reggeons) simply the odd/even number of reggeons.
1006: For SU(2), if $I=0$, only $\tau=-1$ anomalous combinations are possible.
1007: There is also a ``group-theoretic'' signature\cite{gaw} which has
1008: to coincide with the analytic definition.
1009: When parity (P) is conserved, the combination of incoming and outgoing particle
1010: states to which a reggeon combination couples (via a vertex of the form
1011: of Fig.~6(a)) can be assigned a parity which is also
1012: carried by the reggeon state. The signature
1013: is the sign given by
1014: a TCP transformation of the complete coupling. Since T simply
1015: interchanges the ingoing and outgoing particles, it must be that $\tau=CP~$.
1016: As a result, anomalous gluon couplings must have $P=-1$.
1017:
1018: If we consider forward
1019: scattering then $P= -1$ for the coupling implies that there must be a parity
1020: change between the initial and the final scattering state.
1021: In a parity-conserving vector theory, such a change can only come from
1022: an anomaly vertex that contains a zero momentum chirality transition.
1023: Hence anomalous gluons can only couple via anomaly vertices.
1024: They can couple to external states via anomaly
1025: vertices of the form of Fig.~7(a).
1026: \begin{center}
1027: \epsfxsize=5in
1028: \epsffile{fs9.ps}
1029:
1030: Figure 7. (a) External Vertices, and (b) Single Channel Vertices.
1031: \end{center}
1032: There will, however, be no anomalous gluon interactions of the form of Fig.~7(b),
1033: because of the absence of anomaly vertices for single channel interactions.
1034:
1035: As SU(2) color is confined (with a $k_{\perp}$ cut-off) all divergences
1036: exponentiate, except for the infra-red divergence which occurs\cite{arw02} within
1037: a set of $I=0$ anomalous gluons when the transverse
1038: momenta of all the gluons is scaled uniformly to zero.
1039: As we discuss again below, because of the scaling property
1040: of the reggeon kernels, this divergence is preserved as the anomalous gluons
1041: self-interact. Also, there are no interactions of the form of Fig.~7(b) that
1042: would exponentiate the divergence. Divergences in separate channels can be
1043: coupled\cite{arw02} via anomaly vertices and as a result the
1044: simplest divergent di-triple-regge amplitudes
1045: have the form shown in Fig.~8.
1046: \begin{center}
1047: $~~~~~~~~~~~~$ \epsfxsize=5in
1048: \epsffile{fs8.ps}
1049:
1050: Figure 8. A Divergent Di-Triple-Regge Amplitude.
1051: \end{center}
1052: When external left-handed massive vector mesons are utilised, as in
1053: Fig.~4, they provide initial anomalous couplings, that contain Goldstone boson
1054: anomaly poles, as illustrated.
1055: If any of the anomalous gluon configurations in Fig.~8 is replaced by
1056: non-anomalous $I=0$ gluon reggeons then fermion loop interactions, of the form
1057: of Fig.~9, exist that will (because of the absence of Ward identity
1058: zeroes - due to the $k_{\perp}$ cut-off)
1059: exponentiate the amplitude to zero.
1060: Consequently, the divergence necessarily involves
1061: anomalous gluons in every channel.
1062: \begin{center}
1063: \epsfxsize=5.5in
1064: \epsffile{fs10.ps}
1065:
1066: Figure 9. Fermion Loop Interactions
1067: \end{center}
1068:
1069: After the divergence is factored off,
1070: the remaining bound-state ``physical amplitudes''
1071: contain a $k_{\perp}=0~~$ ``wee gluon condensate'' as a relic of the divergence.
1072: In the first approximation, provided by Fig.~8,
1073: \newline \parbox{5in}{
1074: \begin{itemize}
1075: \item{The bound-states are anomaly poles that appear as $I = 0$ combinations of
1076: fermions in the anomalous wee gluon background.}
1077: \item {Interactions
1078: are due to a finite transverse momentum gauge boson, that carries $I=0$,
1079: in the same wee gluon background.}
1080: \end{itemize}}
1081: \hspace{0.1in}
1082: \parbox{0.6in}{
1083: \epsfxsize=0.5in
1084: \epsffile{ms2.ps}
1085:
1086: \vspace{0.2in}
1087:
1088: \epsfxsize=0.5in
1089: \epsffile{ms3.ps}
1090: }
1091: \newline Because the bound-states are anomaly poles, they must be Goldstone bosons and so
1092: there must be a corresponding chiral symmetry - when the confined color is SU(2).
1093: As we noted above,
1094: we can regard the Goldstone bosons as initially created by a product of quark/antiquark
1095: operators provided we
1096: remember that removal of the wee gluon component corresponds to a chirality transition.
1097: As we also observed, we can regard the chirality transition
1098: as equivalent to the zero-momentum
1099: shift of the Dirac sea Fermi surface during the interaction. Using this language,
1100: the lowest-order scattering process of Fig.~8 can be described as follows.
1101:
1102: An anomaly pole Goldstone Boson ``pion'' is created by the product of a physical
1103: quark field and a zero momentum ``unphysical'' antiquark
1104: field in which the Fermi surface is shifted.
1105: The antiquark becomes physical, via a chirality transition, that introduces
1106: an accompanying ``semiclassical'' anomalous wee gluon field (condensate)
1107: that effectively
1108: moves the Fermi surface back to it's perturbative location.
1109: In the scattering process, there is a large rapidity perturbative exchange interaction
1110: in which the wee gluon fields of the incoming pions are transformed
1111: into those of the outgoing pions by anomaly couplings that
1112: involve further shifts of the Fermi surface. The final state pions are
1113: created via further shifts of the Dirac sea that reabsorb the anomalous wee
1114: gluon fields.
1115:
1116: Higher-order effects will add
1117: interactions amongst the gluons in an anomalous gluon state. Divergent
1118: fermion loop contributions are exponentiated out
1119: and the remaining gluon interactions
1120: can be described by kernels $K$
1121: that, because of the infra-red fixed-point, scale in the infra-red region.
1122: As the kernel interactions are iterated the degree of divergence does not increase.
1123: Instead, in an integral involving a product of many kernels, there is
1124: a distinct contribution from each intermediate state. This divergence
1125: can be isolated and the remaining integrations factorized as illustrated in Fig.~10.
1126: \begin{center}
1127: \leavevmode
1128: \epsfxsize=4.5in
1129: \epsffile{fs12.ps}
1130:
1131: Figure~10. Factorization of a Wee Gluon Divergence.
1132: \end{center}
1133: The factorising residues imply that the condensate component of the bound-states
1134: becomes a ``wee gluon distribution'' in which the gluons have
1135: zero transverse momentum but carry non-zero ``wee'' longitudinal momenta.
1136: The wee gluon distribution will have a dynamical
1137: scale, in addition to the cut-off and reggeon masses that we have introduced
1138: as scales. The condensate scale, associated with the divergence, at this point,
1139: is a parameter that has to be determined by matching with supercritical pomeron
1140: theory, as we discuss briefly below..
1141:
1142: As illustrated in Fig.~11, in higher orders there will also be interactions,
1143: containing anomalies, between
1144: the anomalous gluon components of the scattering states and the exchanged ``interaction''
1145: state. These interactions are the source of the
1146: triple pomeron interaction, including
1147: supercritical pomeron interactions, and the mass generation for vector bosons.
1148: \begin{center}
1149: \leavevmode
1150: \epsfxsize=2.3in
1151: \epsffile{fs13.ps}
1152:
1153: Figure~11. Interactions Involving Anomalous Gluons in the Scattering States.
1154: \end{center}
1155:
1156: \mainhead{8. STATES AND AMPLITUDES IN MASSLESS QCD$_S$}
1157:
1158: In CSQCD$_S$, the first approximation to the
1159: interaction is the even signature combination of a massive SU(2) singlet gluon
1160: reggeon in the odd signature anomalous wee gluon condensate. As a result, there
1161: is the pomeron/reggeon exchange degeneracy that defines the supercritical
1162: RFT phase. The wee gluon condensate also produces interactions, of the form of
1163: Fig.~11, that include those of the RFT supercritical pomeron. The restoration of
1164: SU(3) color should then produce the Critical Pomeron
1165: as the QCD$_S$ high-energy interaction.
1166: As part of the approach to the phase transition,
1167: the SU(2) singlet gluon will become massless and
1168: decouple. Simultaneously, the wee gluon condensate will disappear
1169: and a corresponding dynamical degree of freedom will appear. That is, the
1170: shifting of the Dirac sea (the chirality transitions within the anomaly vertices
1171: - the triple pomeron vertex in particular) will become dynamical.
1172: As we already discussed in the Introduction, the shifting of the Dirac sea
1173: is the ``order parameter'' of
1174: the transition. In the supercritical phase this degree of freedom is ordered into
1175: a single, semi-classical, wee gluon gauge field contribution,
1176: while in the sub-critical phase it is random.
1177: For this to happen, longitudinal
1178: vector meson interactions, which at first sight should decouple as the
1179: color symmetry breaking is removed, must still be present - at zero light-cone
1180: momentum. In fact, the role
1181: of zero light-cone momentum, longitudinal, gluons is a major ambiguity of
1182: light-cone quantization\cite{arw84}.
1183: By constructing the high-energy behavior of $QCD_S$ via $CSQCD_S$ we
1184: resolve this ambiguity.
1185:
1186: Much remains to be done to map the reggeon diagrams of CSQCD$_S$ onto
1187: the pomeron diagrams of supercritical RFT. In particular, the
1188: parameters of CSQCD$_S$, including the reggeon condensate value, have to be matched
1189: with the RFT parameters. Because the $k_{\perp}$ cut-off is a relevant parameter
1190: for the RFT critical point, it is very important that this can be removed before the
1191: color symmetry restoration. In \cite{arw93} we describe arguments, that we first
1192: developed a lot earlier, why the number of quark flavors
1193: should be reflected in the pomeron intercept as a parameter and gave
1194: general arguments why
1195: the asymptotic freedom constraint should be saturated, as it is in QCD$_S$.
1196: We also discussed,
1197: how the Critical Pomeron scaling functions contain a variety of critical indices
1198: that have to be closely related to properties of the underlying field theory.
1199: In particular, in the zero mass limit, the elastic scaling function collapses to a
1200: single critical index function
1201: in a way that suggests this index should be a direct property
1202: of an infra-red fixed-point in an underlying vector theory. Very likely, the well-defined
1203: critical indices of the QCD$_S$ fixed-point
1204: are, in fact, the critical indices of the Critical Pomeron scaling functions. In this
1205: sense, this would make the Critical Pomeron the S-Matrix manifestation of the
1206: underlying fixed-point field theory.
1207:
1208: The physical states of QCD$_S$ correspond to the Goldstone bosons of CSQCD$_S$.
1209: Included are
1210: all flavor non-neutral pseudoscalar mesons containing only triplet quarks,
1211: which there will be many of. A potential flavor neutral meson
1212: mixes with pure gluon states and, hence, does not appear as a Goldstone boson.
1213: Since quark and antiquark representations are equivalent
1214: when the gauge symmetry is SU(2), there are also ``nucleon'' Goldstone boson states,
1215: reflecting real chiral symmetries\cite{kog} of $CSQCD_S$.
1216: These states will become baryons by aquiring an additional quark (or
1217: antiquark). To discuss this we need to study more
1218: the role of the SU(2) singlet quarks in $CSQCD_S$.
1219: Since these quarks are not Goldstone bosons, they can not be
1220: physical states. They can, nevertheless, appear in regge exchanges.
1221: In particular, there will be a regge
1222: exchange involving the combination of a
1223: Goldstone boson ``nucleon'' and an SU(2) reggeized quark
1224: that can become a normal, reggeized, nucleon as SU(3) color is restored.
1225: Understanding this better is important because
1226: the corresponding formation of QUD states is considerably more complicated
1227:
1228: There will also be meson and nucleon states involving the two sextet quarks.
1229: If the sextet quarks have the right electroweak quantum numbers and
1230: the electroweak sector is added, the sextet mesons (``sextet pions'')
1231: will be eaten by the electroweak vector bosons and the only remaining
1232: sextet states will be the sextet nucleons (apart from the $\eta_6$, which will have
1233: an electroweak scale mass due to mixing with the pomeron sector). Because
1234: of the larger color factors that are involved, the sextet states will dominate
1235: production cross-sections once the energy is well above the effective threshold
1236: (involving pomeron exchange).
1237:
1238: Because there are no corresponding Goldstone bosons in CSQCD$_S$, there will be
1239: no hybrid sextet/triplet quark states. Consequently,
1240: the lightest sextet nucleon will be stable.
1241: The (triplet quark) proton is lighter than the neutron only because
1242: the current mass of the $d$ quark is bigger than that of the $u$. We expect
1243: effective quark masses to be generated by the embedding of QCD$_S$ in QUD.
1244: However, sextet quark current masses
1245: must remain zero for sextet pions to combine with the massless electroweak vector bosons
1246: to produce massive states.
1247: (More strictly, it is the combination of sextet and triplet quarks that couples to
1248: the vector bosons that must have zero current mass.)
1249: Therefore, the sextet nucleon mass difference
1250: has to be entirely electromagnetic in origin, and
1251: the $N_6$ will be stable. If the sextet
1252: quark dynamical mass is given by the top quark mass, as discussed earlier,
1253: the $N_6$ mass should be $\approx 500~ GeV$ and the $P_6$
1254: mass should be just a little higher. Because
1255: the neutral $N_6$ will not only be stable but will also
1256: dominate ultra high-energy cross-sections it, potentially, provides
1257: a natural explanation for both the production and dominance of ``dark matter''.
1258:
1259: Since triplet and sextet quarks can not combine to form bound states,
1260: sextet nucleons should not form bound states with triplet nucleons.
1261: (If pion exchange provides the binding force for nucleons
1262: to form nuclei,
1263: there is no common ``pion'' to bind sextet and triplet nucleons as nuclei.)
1264: Therefore, we can expect the sextet nucleons to form separate ``dark matter nuclei''.
1265:
1266: The QCD$_S$ pomeron produces rising cross-sections via a critical phenomenon
1267: but, nevertheless,
1268: is a regge pole with RFT interactions and has the factorizing couplings
1269: that are essential if its wee parton component is to be universal and reproduce
1270: ``vacuum properties''. This is a, rarely emphasized, essential requirement for
1271: the validity of an infinite momentum parton model\cite{arw84}.
1272: To the extent that the wee gluon component of infinite momentum states is the
1273: equivalent of a finite energy vacuum, we can say that the ``QCD$_S$ vacuum'' is a
1274: critical phenomenom of dynamical, zero momentum, fermion chirality transisitions.
1275: The physical states that are stable in this ``vacuum'' are
1276: much fewer and the interaction much simpler than in conventional QCD.
1277: Moreover, we have a diagrammatic description
1278: of how the states are formed. The spectrum is
1279: consistent with, but much less than, just requiring confinement
1280: and chiral symmetry breaking.
1281: There is also no BFKL pomeron, no odderon, and no glueballs.
1282: In general, there is much better agreement\cite{ce} with experiment!
1283:
1284: \mainhead{9. QUD STATES AND AMPLITUDES}
1285:
1286: To construct QUD states
1287: and amplitudes we again start with all reggeons carrying global color and with
1288: masses generated by fundamental representation scalars.
1289: For QUD, in contrast to
1290: QCD$_S$, it is essential that
1291: the initial fermion masses are generated by condensates. This
1292: has important consequences for the structure of the anomaly interactions, containing
1293: zero momentum chirality transitions, that remain in the massless theory after the
1294: symmetry breaking is removed.
1295: It is, however, the effect of left-handed reggeon couplings
1296: that is the central element in the structure of QUD reggeon diagram divergences.
1297:
1298: Since a left-handed interaction
1299: violates parity, fermion interactions of the form of Fig.~9 will exist for
1300: both normal and anomalous color parity combinations of
1301: massless gauge bosons in which one or more of the bosons has
1302: a left-handed coupling.
1303: As long as a $k_{\perp}$ cut-off is in
1304: place, therefore, the absence of Ward identity zeroes will
1305: then imply that these interactions
1306: exponentiate to zero any divergences involving massless left-handed reggeons.
1307: Consequently, in QUD the analog of ``anomalous gluon divergences'' in QCD
1308: can not involve left-handed gauge boson reggeons.
1309: Anomalous divergences coupled to
1310: chirality fluctuations, can involve
1311: only a maximal non-abelian vector subgroup. The resulting
1312: ``strong interaction'' pomeron is therefore a singlet under an SU(3) subgroup.
1313: Because the SU(5) color symmetry of reggeons is a global symmetry, an SU(5) singlet
1314: pomeron interaction (involving a minimum of four gauge boson reggeons - with three
1315: forming an anomalous configuration)
1316: can be obtained by, effectively, summing over all SU(3) subgroups.
1317: It is then an outcome of
1318: QUD that the strong interaction is produced by a, parity conserving,
1319: vector interaction that is invariant under an underlying SU(3) gauge group
1320:
1321: To construct QUD amplitudes,
1322: we use the $SU(3)\otimes SU(2)\otimes U(1)$ breakdown described earlier and
1323: denote the various subgroups of SU(5) as in Figure 12.
1324: \begin{center}
1325: \epsfxsize=2.6in
1326: \epsfbox{fs11.ps}
1327:
1328: Figure 12. SU(5) subgroups
1329: \end{center}
1330: The SU(3)$_C$ subgroup
1331: will correspond to a vector interaction.
1332: We will first restore the SU(2)$_C$ symmetry, then go straight to the SU(4)
1333: symmetry. Restoring the SU(3)$_C$ symmetry will coincide with the final
1334: restoration of the full SU(5) symmetry. The x, x' and x'' vectors will, therefore,
1335: remain massive until the final symmetry restoration.
1336: We initially consider
1337: di-triple-regge amplitudes of the form of Fig.~8 with massive, left-handed,
1338: x'' vector bosons as the external states.
1339:
1340: Since SU(2)$_C$ is a vector symmetry, after it is restored
1341: the states will be chiral Goldstone bosons ($~\pi_C$'s~).
1342: These will be $~qq$, $\bar{q}\bar{q}$, and $q\bar{q}$ pairs
1343: in a condensate, where the $q$'s are {\bf 3's, 6's,} \& {\bf 8's} under SU(3)$_C$.
1344: {\bf 8's} are real wrt SU(3)$_C$, but contain complex doublets with respect to
1345: SU(2)$_C$ that will have a chiral symmetry.
1346:
1347: The interactions that are selected by the SU(2) condensate and that
1348: will also produce SU(3)$_C$ singlets (after the final symmetry
1349: restoration) are just
1350: \begin{enumerate}
1351: \item{a massive x gluon in the condensate - corresponding to the supercritical
1352: pomeron.}
1353: \item{SU(2)$_L \otimes$ U(1) bosons
1354: in the condensate, corresponding to W$^{\pm,0}$ and Y vector bosons.}
1355: \end{enumerate}
1356: At first sight, the left-handed bosons will have interactions with the
1357: condensate, of the form
1358: of Fig.~9, that will give exponentiating divergences. However,
1359: interactions of the form shown in Fig.~11,
1360: involving the (vacuum) wee gluons of the scattering states,
1361: give left-handed
1362: $W^{\pm}$ \& $Z^0$ exchanges a mass, via the last anomaly vertex appearing in
1363: Fig.~6 - that corresponds to mixing with the sextet $\pi_C$'s.
1364: (The mixing with octet pions will
1365: disappear after the SU(3)$_C$ symmetry is restored.)
1366: Because of this mixing, the massive vector bosons will carry
1367: the sextet SU(2) flavor symmetry in a manner that will allow them to interact via
1368: anomalies only. This eliminates interactions of the form of Fig.~9.
1369:
1370: Restoring SU(4) symmetry to obtain CSQUD
1371: involves only left-handed and abelian vector
1372: bosons and so all new divergences exponentiate, leaving only
1373: states and interactions that are SU(4) invariant.
1374: ``Leptons'' are present
1375: as reggeon bound states of ``elementary leptons'' and ``octet pions''.
1376: The SU(2)$_L \times$U(1) quantum numbers of octet $\pi$'s are
1377: $ (2,\frac{1}{2}),~ (1,-1)$, and $(3,-1)~$ and so the elementary
1378: lepton component has (modulo gauge boson contributions)
1379: the generation structure of the Standard Model.
1380:
1381: The SU(3)$\times$SU(2)$_L \times$U(1) content of the bound-state leptons is
1382: \begin{enumerate}
1383: \item{ $(e^-,\nu)$ candidate
1384: \newline $ ~~~~\leftrightarrow ~
1385: (1,2,-\frac{1}{2}) \times (8,1,1)(8,2,-\frac{1}{2})$
1386: $~\leftrightarrow~ SU(5)~ singlet~-~ 45^*\times40\times45^*$}
1387: \item{$e^+$ candidate
1388: \newline $~~~~\leftrightarrow ~
1389: (1,3,1) \times (8,2,-\frac{1}{2})(8,2,-\frac{1}{2})$
1390: $~\leftrightarrow~ SU(5)~ singlet~-~ 15\times45^*\times45^*$}
1391: \item{$(\mu^-,\nu)$ candidate
1392: \newline $~~~~ \leftrightarrow ~
1393: (1,2,\frac{1}{2}) (1,2,-\frac{1}{2}) (1,2,-\frac{1}{2})
1394: \times (8,1,1)(8,2,-\frac{1}{2})$
1395: \newline $~~~~ \leftrightarrow~ SU(5)~ singlet
1396: ~-~ 5\times45^*\times45^*\times40\times45^*$}
1397: \item{$(\tau^-,\nu)$ candidate
1398: \newline $~~~~ \leftrightarrow
1399: (1,2,-\frac{3}{2}) (1,2,\frac{1}{2}) (1,2,\frac{1}{2})
1400: \times (8,1,1)(8,2,-\frac{1}{2})$
1401: \newline $ ~~~~\leftrightarrow~ SU(5)~ singlet~ -~ 40\times5\times5\times40\times45^*$}
1402: \end{enumerate}
1403:
1404: Clearly ``hadron'' states will be present that contain a triplet
1405: ``pion'' and, or, a triplet ``nucleon'' combined with octet quark pions.
1406: Similarly there will be sextet ``nucleons'' combined with octet pions.
1407: (The sextet pions will have already been absorbed by the vector bosons.)
1408: When we have described
1409: the fate of octet pions after the full SU(5) restoration, it will be clear why
1410: leptons must involve octet pions. It will not be so clear why SU(5) invariant
1411: quark states should contain octet pions. It seems likely that this is an outcome of the
1412: SU(2)xU(1) anomaly cancellation in the infra-red, but we have yet to understand this.
1413: It may also be that anomaly cancellation effects of this kind are only evident
1414: after the full symmetry restoration.
1415:
1416: The restoration of SU(5) symmetry is an elaborate phenomenon
1417: that certainly needs much more study and that, as yet I only partially understand.
1418: My current understanding includes the following.
1419: \begin{itemize}
1420: \item{The pomeron interaction becomes critical - as an SU(3) subgroup interaction
1421: that is summed over subgroups.}
1422: \item{The $\gamma,W^{\pm}$ and $Z^0$ wee gluon component
1423: becomes even signature.}
1424: \end{itemize}
1425: The octet quarks, which at first sight might have seemed unwanted,
1426: are fundamental for the SU(5) invariance and the generation structure of the states.
1427: \begin{itemize}
1428: \item{After SU(3)$_C$ is restored,
1429: the octet $\pi$'s are no longer Goldstone bosons. Instead, they
1430: contribute to bound-states as (what would normally be unphysical) anomaly
1431: poles generated by large $k_{\perp}$ quark and antiquark pairs which carry opposite
1432: sign energies. This is a subtle, and very crucial,
1433: phenomenon that will be elaborated on in much more detail
1434: in \cite{amtm}.}
1435: \item{SU(3)$_C$ reality implies that the octet $\pi$'s have no anomaly coupling to the
1436: pomeron and so leptons have no strong interaction and no infra-red SU(3)$_C$
1437: mass generation.}
1438: \item{With the octet $\pi$'s contributing to states only at large $k_{\perp}$,
1439: the SU(2)$_L\otimes$U(1) symmetry appears in low $k_{\perp}$ interactions
1440: via the SU(2) flavor symmetry of the sextet sector. This is another phenomenon
1441: that will be discussed in more
1442: detail in \cite{amtm}.}
1443: \item{The SU(2)$\otimes$U(1) quantum numbers of the octet $\pi$'s
1444: implies that low $k_{\perp}$ states will have the singlet/doublet
1445: structure of the Standard model.}
1446: \item{Since the octet pions are embedded in leptons at large $k_{\perp}$, we expect
1447: (although we have yet to develop a proper argument) that the bound-state
1448: lepton contribution
1449: to the infra-red SU(2)$_L\otimes$U(1) anomaly is equal to the perturbative
1450: contribution. This would imply the existence of three generations of leptons.}
1451: \item{The SU(2)$_L\otimes$U(1) anomaly cancellation then
1452: requires the formation of three generations of quark hadrons that similarly
1453: contain the octet pions.}
1454: \end{itemize}
1455:
1456: Although we will not attempt to discuss it in any detail here, the mass spectrum will be
1457: generated by a combination of factors. Firstly, there will be straightforward
1458: perturbative reggeization effects that carry, initially, the momentum scale corresponding
1459: to the evolution scale of the underlying gauge theory. Large color factors and the,
1460: related, high mass sector will emphasize the SU(3) strong interaction. In addition,
1461: anomaly interactions, analagous to that generating the $W$ and $Z$ masses, will mix
1462: all the reggeon states. There seems every reason to believe that the large
1463: disparity in (generalised) color factors can produce a wide range of scales within
1464: the S-Matrix. The most obvious example being the disparity in scales
1465: for the strong and electroweak interaction produced by Casimir scaling of SU(3) color
1466: factors. Without a better understanding of the anomaly interactions
1467: and the related wee gluon distributions it is unclear how many parameters could be
1468: involved, in general. In particular,
1469: although CP violation could easily be a consequence of
1470: chiral anomaly dominance of interactions, at this point it is obviously not
1471: clear whether it is actually necessary. Nevertheless, to suggest
1472: that the physical mass spectrum could emerge from QUD is clearly not unreasonable.
1473:
1474: \mainhead{10. GENERAL PROPERTIES}
1475:
1476: Apart from explaining why the strong interaction is an SU(3) vector theory
1477: and why it is that the left-handed interaction aquires a mass,
1478: there are many other general features of QUD that are encouraging.
1479: \begin{enumerate}
1480: \item{
1481: The experimentally attractive SU(5) value of the Weinberg angle should hold -
1482: even though there is no proton decay !}
1483: \item{Small $\alpha_u$ should be the explanation of small neutrino masses.}
1484: \item{The QCD sector agrees better\cite{ce} with experiment (than conventional QCD)
1485: - no glueballs, no BFKL pomeron and no odderon.}
1486: \item{The existence and dominance of Dark Matter is naturally explained.}
1487: \item{The electroweak symmetry breaking shares key features with successful\cite{ffrs}
1488: ``Walking Technicolor'' theories that are
1489: consistent with precision constraints.}
1490: \item{The high mass QCD sector produces unification without supersymmetry.}
1491: \item{There are no unwanted symmetries constraining the mass spectrum.}
1492: \item{QUD is contained in a single SO(10) representation - the {\bf 144}.
1493: Although there is no S-Matrix for the enlarged
1494: representation (according to our arguments) this could be
1495: relevant for \{string?\} unification with gravity?}
1496: \end{enumerate}
1497:
1498: \mainhead{11. WHAT SHOULD BE SEEN AT THE LHC?}
1499:
1500: In this Section I will briefly review what should be seen at the LHC and
1501: how, in particular, double pomeron processes can provide the definitive
1502: proof that a sextet sector has appeared. A more extended discussion can be found in
1503: \cite{arw05}.
1504:
1505: Because large cross-sections are involved, the emergence of the
1506: sextet sector should be obvious.
1507: The immediate evidence will be that multiple vector boson and jet x-sections are
1508: much, much, larger than expected. $<p_{\perp}>$ should undergo a major increase
1509: from the low energy hadron scale and move significantly towards the electroweak scale.
1510: There will, however, be competing explanations for these effects, such as
1511: black holes, sphalerons, etc..
1512:
1513: A priori, $N_6\bar{N}_6$ pair production (dark matter) should be seen - with
1514: the $N_6$ mass, perhaps, $\sim 500 ~GeV$. Unfortunately, this will be difficult to detect,
1515: since missing energies of several hundred GeV will be common.
1516: Also the low energy $N_6$ hadronic
1517: cross-section, for collisions in a calorimeter, is probably small.
1518: $P_6\bar{P}_6$ pair production should be seen
1519: - assuming the $P_6$ is not too unstable. Again, however,
1520: a massive charged particle with a large production x-section
1521: will not be immediately identified with the sextet sector !
1522:
1523: Surprisingly, perhaps, the double pomeron cross-section could actually provide
1524: the most definitive evidence for the existence of the sextet sector.
1525: With the pomerons detected via Roman pots, the environment is clean and
1526: well controlled. $W$ and $Z$ pairs will be produced in the double pomeron
1527: cross-section via sextet pion anomaly poles.
1528: As (triplet quark) pion pairs dominate the double pomeron
1529: cross-section at low mass, so $W$ and $Z$ pair production will dominate the
1530: cross-section at the electroweak mass scale. Naively, a factor of
1531: $~[ F_{\pi_6}/ F_{\pi_3}]^4~
1532: ~ \centerunder{\raisebox{0.5mm}{${\scriptstyle >}$}}{${\scriptstyle \sim}$}
1533: ~O(10^{12})~$ is involved in relating
1534: sextet and triplet sector ``pion'' anomaly-pole cross-sections. However,
1535: this is not very useful since normal double-pomeron production of pions
1536: does not involve vector states and so does not proceed via anomaly poles.
1537:
1538: When $|k_{\perp}|$ is electroweak scale,
1539: the double-pomeron $ W$ and $Z$ pair amplitude for producing jets is comparable
1540: with a standard jet amplitude that has, apart from anomaly
1541: loops that are O(1), the same propagators and couplings. This suggests
1542: that the jet cross-section from double-pomeron $W$ and $Z$ pairs will be
1543: comparable with the non-diffractive jet
1544: cross-sections predicted by standard QCD.
1545: While the $~\pom~ W^+W^-~\pom~$ and $~\pom~ Z^0Z^0~\pom~$
1546: vertices should vary only slowly with $k_{\perp}$, the $pp~\pom~$
1547: vertices have strong $ k_{\perp}$-dependence. This implies there should be
1548: an extremely large x-section at small $t$.
1549:
1550: In the initial low luminosity running, an ``extremely large x-section''
1551: could be detected by TOTEM in combination with the CMS central detector
1552: (assuming it is operational) - where it should be
1553: straightforward to look for the leptonic decays of $W$ and $Z$ pairs. Apart from
1554: factors of sextet isospin, the $Z$ pair cross-section will have the same order
1555: of magnitude as the $W$ pair cross-section. Consequently,
1556: some spectacular events should be expected,
1557: in which protons are tagged and only (a multitude of)
1558: large $E_T$ charged leptons are seen in the central detector.
1559:
1560: FP420 (with Roman pots designed to look for a Standard Model Higgs' boson)
1561: will take over during the high luminosity running
1562: and should surely see an enhanced cross-section, even if it is too small
1563: to have been seen by CMS/TOTEM. With the planned parameters for FP420,
1564: the $W$ and $Z$ pair cross-section should overwhelm all other physics.
1565:
1566: The observation of a very large double-pomeron cross-section for $W$ and $Z$ pairs
1567: would imply that the longitudinal components of the $W$ and the $Z$
1568: have direct strong interactions. The only known possibility for this
1569: is the existence of the sextet sector and, as we have discussed, to give a well-defined
1570: theory this sector has to be embedded in QUD !
1571:
1572: After the combination of $\pom$, $W/Z$, and jet physics has established that
1573: sextet quark physics is definitively discovered,
1574: the search for ``dark matter'' will become all important.
1575: The cross-section for double-pomeron production
1576: of stable $N_6\bar{N}_6$ pairs (with a pair mass
1577: $~ \centerunder{\raisebox{0.5mm}{${\scriptstyle >}$}}{${\scriptstyle \sim}$}
1578: ~1~TeV$)
1579: could be large enough that it will be definitively seen by the forward pot
1580: experiments. It will be a spectacular process to look for - via the following.
1581: \begin{enumerate}
1582: \item {The tagged protons determine
1583: a very massive state is produced.}
1584: \item {No charged particles are seen
1585: in any of the detectors.}
1586: \item{Having low energy, the $N_6$ hadronic
1587: cross-section will, probably, be small
1588: but some hadronic activity may be seen in the central calorimeter.}
1589: \item {Charged lepton comparison would
1590: allow a separation wrt the multiple $Z^0$ production of neutrinos.}
1591: \end{enumerate}
1592: Of course, if the $P_6$ is relatively stable,
1593: and not too different in mass from the $N_6$, it would be much simpler
1594: to first detect $P_6\bar{P}_6$ pairs.
1595:
1596: \mainhead{12. COMMENTS AND PERSPECTIVE}
1597:
1598: Although there is not as much speculation in what I have described
1599: as probably appears to be the case to the non-specialist reader (almost everyone),
1600: there certainly is a considerable amount. Even with the publication of \cite{amtm},
1601: much will remain that needs to be both better established and also
1602: better understood. Many
1603: questions will remain unanswered and many details will still be missing.
1604: As a result, it will surely be some time
1605: before serious calculational procedures can be developed.
1606: Nevertheless, I am hopeful that my discovery of QUD, and all of it's remarkable
1607: properties, will eventually demonstrate that (contrary to popular belief)
1608: solving the infra-red problem of constructing
1609: physical states that produce a unitary S-Matrix may actually
1610: be more difficult, more special,
1611: and ultimately at least as fundamental as the
1612: solving of the ultra-violet problem of a field theory.
1613:
1614: While it may appear that I have introduced
1615: way too much that is radical, and in conflict with the current theoretical
1616: paradigm, I would argue that this was not by choice. I have been led along the
1617: path I have followed by logical necessity. Most signicantly, I have been led
1618: to, what seems to me at least to be, a very beautiful proposition,
1619: that the relevant entity for particle physics
1620: is the bound-state S-Matrix of a very special, small $\beta$-function,
1621: massless field theory that, at first sight, is an ``unparticle theory''\cite{hg}.
1622: In fact, as I have described, the zero momentum ``Fermi surface''
1623: of the massless Dirac
1624: sea offers crucial possibilities for wee gluon interactions via anomalies that prevent
1625: the scale invariance property of the unparticle theory from carrying over into
1626: the physical S-Matrix (although understanding and elaborating how
1627: all the S-Matrix scales originate is a significant
1628: part of the work that remains to be done).
1629: More importantly, perhaps, it seems that the massless gauge
1630: theory need only be evident in (and, therefore, need only exist as a quantum field theory
1631: in) short-distance perturbation theory. Mass generation becomes an S-Matrix
1632: property which is, effectively, separated from the problem of having a sufficiently
1633: well-defined short-distance field theory.
1634:
1635: It is important to emphasize that, besides my construction
1636: via multi-regge theory, there is no other formalism capable of
1637: constructing bound-state scattering amplitudes. Without this ability
1638: it would not have been possible to envision the existence of an S-Matrix within
1639: a field theory with the properties of QUD.
1640: In effect, I diagrammatically construct the
1641: high-energy S-Matrix via infra-red and ultra-violet cut-off manipulations
1642: that determine the contribution of fermion anomalies
1643: in the (multi-regge region) perturbation expansion. Although I have very little
1644: idea as to how the finite energy S-Matrix might be analagously obtained, it
1645: seems unlikely that the states I find could appear as intermediate states
1646: in any off-shell Green's functions. (As we noted in the Introduction, if there were
1647: a connection to field operator Green's functions, infra-red scale
1648: invariance would be in conflict with \cite{asv} the existence of a particle spectrum.)
1649: The zero momentum chirality transitions and resulting anomalous wee gluon interactions
1650: are introduced via the formation of asymptotic states and so are
1651: clearly particular to the S-Matrix. As a result, I anticipate that the S-Matrix is the
1652: only well-defined non-perturbative element of the theory.
1653: Although this is a radical notion, according to current thinking, it
1654: is well-established historically that it is
1655: fully viable from a practical (experimental) viewpoint\cite{hs}. It could also
1656: have the great advantage that (as a matter of principle) there would be no
1657: need to confront the overwhelmingly difficult, and so far elusively intractable,
1658: problem\cite{jw}
1659: of constructing a full, non-perturbative, quantum field theory (with or without
1660: a mass gap) in four dimensions.
1661:
1662: We can ask, of course, why the massless field theory has to be QUD. My answer
1663: has been that I demand the appearance of the Critical Pomeron. However, I can also
1664: phrase this requirement
1665: in terms that would be, perhaps, more familiar to the general reader
1666: via comments already made in previous Sections.
1667: The (infra-red fixed-point) small $\beta$-function is required, firstly
1668: for the persistence of the
1669: scaling wee gluon interactions that enhance infra-red fermion anomaly
1670: interactions, and
1671: secondly to allow the color-superconductivity starting point that resolves the
1672: quantization ambiguities associated with Gribov copies and Gauss's law.
1673: The vector interaction non-abelian gauge group has to be as large as
1674: SU(3) to produce, via scaling wee gluon interactions, a
1675: universal wee gluon distribution that can carry vacuum properties. This property
1676: is surely essential\cite{arw84} for the existence of an infinite momentum
1677: ``parton model'' that allows asymptotically free perturbation theory to produce an
1678: ultra-violet finite S-Matrix. If the vector gauge group is larger than SU(3),
1679: the anomalous wee gluon scaling interactions are more complicated and
1680: the universal wee parton property is lost. The SU(3) gauge group can, however, be
1681: extended by left-handed interactions, that aquire a mass via the anomalies,
1682: since the only effect
1683: is to also generate bound state masses. This is a beneficial effect in that it
1684: alleviates potential S-Matrix infra-red problems. (Essentially,
1685: the infinite momentum, wee parton, properties are not affected.) Asking that this
1686: extension generates masses for all bound-states while introducing no short-distance
1687: anomaly then brings us close to, if not directly to, QUD. Therefore,
1688: I believe that although I have funneled my discussion
1689: through the Critical Pomeron, in fact all of the properties needed to obtain a
1690: well-defined particle S-Matrix come together to uniquely select QUD.
1691:
1692: It is currently accepted, almost without question, that ``non-perturbative'' QCD
1693: and all similar
1694: unbroken non-abelian gauge theories should be
1695: well-defined by the euclidean path integral. This is taken to imply that
1696: there must be a physical S-Matrix and that, moreover, the physical states appear as
1697: intermediate states in off-shell Green's functions (derived from the path
1698: integral) of appropriate operators. Although there is no evidence to support
1699: this hypothesis, the considerable
1700: phenomenological success of various ``non-perturbative QCD'' formalisms, particularly
1701: lattice QCD, implies there must be some approximate truth in the assumptions.
1702: Nevertheless, at the level where we are asking to understand why a theory is uniquely
1703: chosen by nature it is important to emphasize that approximations are being made
1704: and that there are significant assumptions involved.
1705:
1706: The existence of a short-distance field theory may be essential, not only for
1707: the large momentum finiteness of the S-Matrix, but also, as discussed in \cite{arw00},
1708: for local analyticity properties.
1709: That the S-Matrix can be obtained from ``non-perturbative'' off-shell Green's functions
1710: does not, however, appear to be essential for any of it's basic properties. The
1711: global analyticity domains that are normally thought to be a consequence of an
1712: off-shell field theory probably follow from the construction of physical high-energy
1713: amplitudes via the perturbation expansion. In fact, when the fields are massless and
1714: bound states related to infra-red anomalies are involved there is probably no
1715: general reason to expect a connection between Green's functions and the S-Matrix.
1716:
1717: In general, there is not even a formal
1718: property of a non-abelian gauge theory path integral which implies that a
1719: unitary, bound-state, S-Matrix can be derived via Green's functions.
1720: Even worse, because of infra-red problems, the path integral itself is, most likely,
1721: not well-defined - both because of the infinite
1722: volume convergence
1723: problem in four dimensions and, more seriously perhaps,
1724: because of the ambiguity of the function space implied by the Gribov copy problem.
1725: Since there are no ``non-perturbative'' methods for constructing gauge theory
1726: S-Matrix amplitudes that do not, effectively, appeal to the formal euclidean
1727: functional integral,
1728: to seriously discuss whether a unitary S-Matrix exists in a general gauge theory
1729: is a highly non-trivial problem.
1730:
1731: Of course, it would be incredible
1732: if the Standard Model, with all of it's
1733: complexity, has the underlying simplicity that I have suggested. Nevertheless,
1734: all the necessary ingredients are present and if the predicted effects of the sextet sector
1735: are seen at the LHC, I doubt that
1736: the radical/heretical nature of what I am proposing will impede the rapid rise of
1737: interest in QUD that will surely ensue. It is important to emphasize that, in principle,
1738: there is no freedom for variation in QUD. It is an ``all or nothing'' explanation
1739: of the origin of the Standard Model. Although my current understanding has not allowed
1740: any really quantative predictions, an unavoidable
1741: central element and most striking prediction of QUD is
1742: that the new physics producing electroweak symmetry breaking is due to an additional
1743: strong interaction sector that will be abundantly evident at the LHC.
1744:
1745:
1746:
1747: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1748:
1749: \bibitem{cri} A.~A.~Migdal, A.~M.~Polyakov and K.~A.~Ter-Martirosoyan,
1750: {\it Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.} {\bf 67}, 84 (1974);
1751: H.~D.~I.~Abarbanel and J.~B.~Bronzan, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D9}, 2397 (1974).
1752:
1753: \bibitem{amtm} A.~R.~White, ``A Massless Theory of Matter'' - to appear.
1754:
1755: \bibitem{kw} K.~Kang and A.~R.~White, {\it Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A2},
1756: 409 (1987).
1757:
1758: \bibitem{arw05} A.~R.~White, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D72}, 036007 (2005).
1759:
1760: \bibitem{wm} W.~J.~Marciano, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D21}, 2425 (1980).
1761:
1762: \bibitem{bww}~E.~Braaten, A.~R.~White and C.~R.~Willcox, {\it Int. J. Mod.
1763: Phys.}, {\bf A1}, 693 (1986).
1764:
1765: \bibitem{hg} H.~Georgi, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 98:221601}, (2007).
1766:
1767: \bibitem{asv} A.~Armoni, M.~Shifman and G.~Veneziano, hep-th/0403071.
1768:
1769: \bibitem{nik} See S.~I.~ Nikolsky, {\it Phys. Atom. Nucl.} {\bf 62},
1770: 2048 (1999), for references.
1771:
1772: \bibitem{cores} Z.~Cao, L.~K.~Ding, Q.~Q.~Zhu, Y.~D.~He,
1773: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D56} 7361 (1997).
1774:
1775: \bibitem{CDFb} CDF Collaboration, ``CDF-QCD Group Run 2 Results''
1776: - http://www-cdf.fnal.gov/physics/new/qcd/inclusive/index.html. This is
1777: an early Run 2 analysis which clearly makes my point. A variety of
1778: ``more sophisticated'' jet algorithms have since been developed that improve
1779: the agreement between theory and experiment.
1780:
1781: \bibitem{CDF} CDF Collaboration (T. Affolder et al.),
1782: {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 88} 042001 (2002).
1783:
1784: \bibitem{mm} M.~Moshe, {\it Phys. Repts.} {\bf 37}, 256 (1978).
1785:
1786: \bibitem{arw84} A.~R.~White, {\it Phys. Rev. } {\bf D29}, 1435 (1984).
1787: Although I did not properly understand the anomaly-based dynamics at the time,
1788: this paper already describes why the Critical Pomeron is needed to provide
1789: an infinite-momentum parton model and also how it is
1790: that QCD$_S$ gives the Critical Pomeron.
1791:
1792: \bibitem{arw98} A.~R.~White, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D58}, 074008 (1998).
1793: This paper describes all the necessary multi-regge limits, as well as the
1794: construction of multi-reggeon diagrams via reggeon unitarity. See also
1795: A.~R.~White, {\it Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A11}, 1859 (1991),
1796: H.~P.~Stapp H P, in {\it Structural Analysis of Collision Amplitudes},
1797: North Holland (1976) and A.~R.~White, ibid.
1798:
1799: \bibitem{arw00} A.~R.~White, ``The Past and Future of S-Matrix Theory'',
1800: published in ``Scattering'', edited
1801: by E.~R.~Pike and P.~Sabatier (Academic Press, 2002).
1802:
1803: \bibitem{bs} J.~B.~Bronzan and R.~L.~Sugar, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D17},
1804: 585 (1978), this paper explicitly organizes the transverse momentum diagram results from
1805: H.~Cheng and C.~Y.~Lo, Phys. Rev. {\bf D13}, 1131 (1976),
1806: {\bf D15}, 2959 (1977), into reggeon diagrams satisfying reggeon unitarity.
1807:
1808: \bibitem{fs} E.~Fradkin and S.~H.~ Shenker, Phys. Rev. {\bf D19}, 3682 (1979);
1809: T.~Banks and E.~Rabinovici, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B160}, 349 (1979).
1810:
1811: \bibitem{fl} V.~S.~Fadin and L.~N.~Lipatov, {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B406},
1812: {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B477}, 767 (1996) and further references therein.
1813:
1814: \bibitem{arw02} A.~R.~White, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D66}, 056007 (2002).
1815:
1816: \bibitem{bz} T.~Banks and A.~Zaks, {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B196}, 189 (1982).
1817:
1818: \bibitem{gw} D.~J.~Gross and F.~Wilczek, Phys. Rev. {\bf D8}, 3633 (1973).
1819:
1820: \bibitem{cel} T.~P.~Cheng, E.~Eichten and L.~F.~Li, Phys. Rev. {\bf D9},
1821: 2259 (1974).
1822:
1823: \bibitem{gaw} P.~Goddard and A.~R.~White, {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B17}, 45 (1970).
1824:
1825: \bibitem{arw93} A.~R.~White, {\it J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A8}, 4755 (1993).
1826:
1827: \bibitem{kog} J.~B.~ Kogut, M.~A.~Stephanov, D.~Toublan,
1828: J.~J.~M.~ Verbaarschot and A.~Zhitnitsky, {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B582},
1829: 477 (2000).
1830:
1831: \bibitem{ce} It is well-known that conventional QCD anticipates a
1832: wide variety of glueball states and that, so far, none have been convincingly observed -
1833: E.~Klempt, {\it Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A21}, 739 (2006).
1834: Similarly the BFKL pomeron and the Odderon are perturbative components
1835: of conventional QCD that have not been definitively observed -
1836: C.~Ewerz, ``The Perturbative Pomeron and the Odderon: Where
1837: Can We Find Them?'' hep-ph/0403051.
1838:
1839: \bibitem{ffrs} R.~Foadi, M.~T.~Frandsen, T.~A.~Ryttov, F.~Sannino, arXiv:0706.1696 [hep-ph].
1840:
1841: \bibitem{hs} H.~P.~ Stapp, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D3}, 1303 (1971).
1842:
1843: \bibitem{jw} ``Quantum Yang-Mills Theory'',
1844: A.~M.~Jaffe, E.~Witten, Clay Mathematics Institute Millenium Prize Problem (2000).
1845:
1846: \end{thebibliography}
1847:
1848: \end{document}
1849:
1850:
1851:
1852:
1853:
1854: