0803.4362/CQMC.tex
1: % ****** CQMC.TeX, final 31 March 2008 ******
2: %
3: %   This file is part of the APS files in the REVTeX 4 distribution.
4: %   Version 4.0 of REVTeX, August 2001
5: %
6: %   Copyright (c) 2001 The American Physical Society.
7: %
8: %   See the REVTeX 4 README file for restrictions and more information.
9: %
10: % TeX'ing this file requires that you have AMS-LaTeX 2.0 installed
11: % as well as the rest of the prerequisites for REVTeX 4.0
12: %
13: % See the REVTeX 4 README file
14: % It also requires running BibTeX. The commands are as follows:
15: %
16: %  1)  latex apssamp.tex
17: %  2)  bibtex apssamp
18: %  3)  latex apssamp.tex
19: %  4)  latex apssamp.tex
20: %
21: %\documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
22: %\documentclass[preprint,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
23: 
24: % Some other (several out of many) possibilities
25: %\documentclass[preprint,aps,showpacs,showkeys,amsmath,amssymb,nopreprintnumbers,nofootinbib]{revtex4}
26: \documentclass[preprint,aps,showpacs,showkeys,amsmath,amssymb,nofootinbib]{revtex4}
27: %
28: %\documentclass[preprint,aps]{revtex4}
29: %\documentclass[prb]{revtex4}% Physical Review B
30: 
31: %\usepackage{epsfig}% Include figure files
32: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
33: %\usepackage{graphics}% Include figure files
34: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
35: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
36: 
37: %\nofiles
38: 
39: %Newcommand
40: \def\bge{\begin{equation}}
41: \def\ene{\end{equation}}
42: \def\bg{\begin{eqnarray}}
43: \def\en{\end{eqnarray}}
44: %
45: 
46: \begin{document}
47: 
48: \preprint{JLAB-THY-08-807}
49: 
50: \title{Quark-meson coupling model with the cloudy bag}% Force line breaks with \\
51: 
52: \author{S. Nagai}
53: %\altaffiliation[Also at ]{
54: %}%Lines break automatically or can be forced with \\
55: \author{T. Miyatsu}
56: %\altaffiliation[Also at ]
57: %}%Lines break automatically or can be forced with \\
58: \author{K. Saito}%
59: \email{ksaito@ph.noda.tus.ac.jp}
60: \affiliation{%
61: Department of Physics, Faculty of Science and Technology,\\
62: Tokyo University of Science, Noda 278-8510, Japan 
63: }%
64: 
65: \author{K. Tsushima}
66: %\altaffiliation
67: %[Also at ]
68: % \homepage{http://www.Second.institution.edu/~Charlie.Author}
69: \affiliation{Excited Baryon Analysis Center (EBAC), Theory Group, 
70: Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility\\
71: 12000 Jefferson Avenue, Newport News, VA 23606, USA% with \\
72: }%
73: 
74: \date{\today}% It is always \today, today,
75:              %  but any date may be explicitly specified
76: 
77: \begin{abstract}
78: Using the volume coupling version of the cloudy bag model, the quark-meson coupling model is extended to study 
79: the role of pion field and the properties of nuclear matter. 
80: The extended model includes the effect of gluon exchange as well as 
81: the pion-cloud effect,  
82: and provides a good description of the nuclear matter properties. 
83: The relationship between the extended model and the EFT approach 
84: to nuclear matter is also discussed. 
85: \end{abstract}
86: 
87: \pacs{12.39.Ba, 21.65.-f, 12.39.Ki}% PACS, the Physics and Astronomy
88:                              % Classification Scheme.
89: \keywords{quark-meson coupling model, nuclear matter, cloudy bag, chiral symmetries}
90: %Use showkeys class option if keyword
91:                               %display desired
92: \maketitle
93: 
94: The quark-meson coupling (QMC) model~\cite{qmc} can be considered as an extension of Quantum Hadrodynamics (QHD) 
95: to include the effect of the internal structure of a nucleon in matter.  The model describes a nuclear system by non-overlapping 
96: MIT bags, in which the confined quarks interact through the self-consistent exchange of isoscalar, scalar ($\sigma$) and vector 
97: ($\omega$) mesons.  In the past few decades, it has been extensively 
98: developed and applied to various nuclear phenomena with 
99: tremendous success~\cite{qmc}. 
100: 
101: On the other hand, a major breakthrough occurred in the problem of nucleon-nucleon (NN) force by introducing the concept of an effective 
102: field theory (EFT)~\cite{mach}. 
103: The QCD Lagrangian for massless up and down quarks is chirally symmetric, and the axial symmetry is spontaneously broken. 
104: This implies the existence of the massless Nambu-Goldstone bosons, namely the pions. The non-zero pion mass is then a consequence of
105: the fact that the light quark has a small mass.
106: Thus, one arrives at a low-energy scenario that pions and nucleons 
107: (and possibly deltas) interact via a force
108: governed by spontaneously broken, approximate chiral symmetry. 
109: 
110: In EFT, the degrees of freedom of quarks and gluons (including heavy mesons and nucleon resonances) should be 
111: {\it integrated out} (or {\it cutoff}), because a probe with wavelength $\lambda$ is insensitive 
112: to details of structure at distances much smaller than it~\cite{lepage}.  
113: Instead, it is necessary to add local (contact) interactions with low-energy constants (LECs) to the Lagrangian 
114: to mimic the effect of the true short distance physics. 
115: The LECs are determined empirically from fits to $\pi$N and/or NN scattering data, and vary with the momentum cutoff ($\sim \lambda^{-1}$) 
116: accounting for quantum fluctuations excluded by the cutoff~\cite{lepage}.  
117: Up to N$^3$LO, EFT can provide the peripheral NN scattering data (below about $250$ MeV lab. energy) very accurately~\cite{mach2}. 
118:  
119: Recently, EFT has been intensively applied to the problem of nuclear matter. 
120: In addition to the usual (small momentum) expansion in the free NN or $\pi$N scattering, physical observables in matter are 
121: expanded in terms of the Fermi momentum $k_F$, which is also a relevant, small scale. 
122: Such density dependence arises from the 
123: Pauli blocking effect in matter, i.e., the medium insertion including the step-function, $\theta(k_F - |{\vec p}\,|)$, in the nucleon 
124: propagator. Then, the strengths of the LECs are fine-tuned so as to reproduce the nuclear matter properties~\cite{density}. 
125: %, which may be different from the values determined in the EFT treatment of (free) $NN$ or $\pi N$ 
126: %scattering~\cite{density}. 
127: 
128: %Now, is it {\it unnecessary} to consider the degrees of freedom of quarks and gluons in low-energy nuclear systems? 
129: If the internal structure of the nucleon were completely {\it frozen} in a nuclear medium or the same as that in free space, 
130: it might be sufficient to consider the density dependence solely 
131: stemming from the Pauli blocking effect. 
132: However, if the in-medium nucleon were metamorphosed depending on 
133: the nuclear density $\rho_B$, 
134: the situation may be different.  In fact, the evidence for 
135: the medium modification of nucleon 
136: structure was observed in polarization transfer measurement 
137: in the quasi-elastic ($e$, $e^\prime p$) reaction at the 
138: Thomas Jefferson national accelerator facility, and the result supports the prediction of the QMC model~\cite{jlab}. 
139: It also seems vital to consider the internal structure change of the nucleon to understand the nuclear EMC effect~\cite{emc}.  
140: 
141: The QMC model can describe the medium modification of the nucleon structure through the quark model, and 
142: %(although it is rather model-dependent), and  
143: predict the density (or mean scalar-field) dependence of physical quantities~\cite{qmc}. 
144: Expanding such modification in terms of $k_F$ and comparing with 
145: the values of LECs given in the EFT approach,\footnote{
146: In fact, from the poin of view of the quark and gluon degrees of freedom, the QMC model can explain the values of 
147: the coefficients appearing in the familiar (contact) Skyrme force in conventional nuclear physics~\cite{skyrme}.
148: }  
149: it may be possible to study whether the internal structure change of a nucleon 
150: indeed shows up in matter, 
151: since the LECs involve all information on the short distance physics. 
152: 
153: %However, it may be a very complex project. As the first step 
154: To carry out such a complicated investigation, 
155: as a first step, we need to develop  
156: a new version of the QMC model for nuclear matter, 
157: where the structure of nucleon (and delta) 
158: is treated based on chiral symmetry. 
159: We attempt this in the present study using the 
160: volume coupling version of the cloudy bag model (CBM), which incorporates 
161: major results of the current algebra for 
162: low energy $\pi$N scattering~\cite{tony}.  
163: 
164: The Lagrangian density for the volume coupling version of the CBM in flavor SU(2) is given by~\cite{tony} 
165: %
166: \bge
167: {\cal L}_{CBM} =  \left[ {\bar \psi} \left\{ i\gamma_\mu {\cal D}^\mu + \frac{1}{2f_\pi} \gamma_\mu \gamma_5 
168: {\vec \tau} 
169: \cdot (D^\mu {\vec \phi}) \right\} \psi -B \right] \theta_V - \frac{1}{2}{\bar \psi} \psi \delta_S 
170: + \frac{1}{2} ( D_\mu {\vec \phi} \,)^2 + {\cal L}_{\chi B} , \label{chiralv-lag}
171: \ene
172: %
173: with $\psi$ the quark field, ${\vec \phi}$ the pion field, 
174: $\phi = ({\vec \phi}\cdot {\vec \phi})^{1/2}$, ${\hat \phi} = {\vec \phi}/|{\vec \phi}|$, $f_\pi$ ($=93$ MeV) the pion decay constant, 
175: $B$ the bag constant, $\theta_V$ the step function for the bag, $\delta_S$ the surface $\delta$-function, 
176: $D_\mu {\vec \phi} = (\partial_\mu \phi) {\hat \phi} + f_\pi \sin(\phi /f_\pi)\partial_\mu {\hat \phi}$ and 
177: ${\cal D}^\mu \psi = \partial^\mu \psi - \frac{i}{2}[ \cos (\phi /f_\pi)-1 ] {\vec \tau}\cdot ({\hat \phi} 
178: \times \partial^\mu {\hat \phi}) \psi$.
179: The last term includes the quark mass, $m$, which explicitly breaks chiral symmetry, and 
180: the pion mass, $m_\pi (=138$ MeV): 
181: ${\cal L}_{\chi B} = - m {\bar \psi} e^{-i{\vec \tau}\cdot {\vec \phi}\gamma_5 /f_\pi} \psi \theta_V - \frac{1}{2}m_\pi^2 
182: {\vec \phi}\,^2$.
183: 
184: As in the CBM, we linearize the pion field and keep ${\cal O}(1/f_\pi)$ 
185: (the convergence properties of the CBM were given in Ref.~\cite{tony}).  
186: The Lagrangian density then reads 
187: %
188: \bg
189: {\cal L}_{CBM} &=& 
190: \left[ {\bar \psi} \left\{ i\gamma_\mu \partial^\mu -m + i \frac{m}{f_\pi}\gamma_5 {\vec \tau} \cdot {\vec \phi} 
191: + \frac{1}{2f_\pi} \gamma_\mu \gamma_5 {\vec \tau} \cdot (\partial^\mu {\vec \phi}) \right\} \psi -B \right] \theta_V 
192: - \frac{1}{2}{\bar \psi} \psi \delta_S  \nonumber \\
193: &+& \frac{1}{2} ( \partial_\mu {\vec \phi}\, )^2 - \frac{1}{2}m_\pi^2 {\vec \phi}\,^2 . \label{cbm-lag}
194: \en
195: %
196: Here the pion field interacts with the quark through both the pseudovector (pv) and 
197: pseudoscalar (ps) couplings.  The strength of the ps coupling is 
198: ${\cal O}(m/f_\pi)$, which explicitly shows the breaking scale of chiral symmetry.  
199: %Thus, the pseudoscalar coupling may provide a measure of the chiral symmetry breaking. 
200: 
201: We introduce the gluon field as well. The resulting Lagrangian density is thus given by 
202: %
203: \bge
204: {\cal L}_{CBM} = {\cal L}_{BAG} + {\cal L}_{\pi} + {\cal L}_{g} + {\cal L}_{int} , \label{cbm-lag2}
205: \ene
206: %
207: where 
208: %
209: \bge
210: {\cal L}_{BAG} = \left[ {\bar \psi} ( i\gamma_\mu \partial^\mu -m) \psi -B \right] \theta_V - \frac{1}{2}{\bar \psi} \psi 
211: \delta_S , 
212: \ene
213: %
214: \bge
215: {\cal L}_{int} = {\bar \psi} \left[ i \frac{m}{f_\pi}\gamma_5 {\vec \tau} \cdot {\vec \phi} 
216: + \frac{1}{2f_\pi} \gamma_\mu \gamma_5 {\vec \tau} \cdot (\partial^\mu {\vec \phi}) 
217: + \frac{g}{2} \gamma_\mu {\vec \lambda} \cdot {\vec A}^\mu  \right] \psi \, \theta_V  , \label{int-lag}
218: \ene
219: %
220: with ${\vec \lambda}$ the SU(3) generators and $g$ the quark-gluon coupling constant. 
221: The free pion field and the kinetic energy of the gluon field, ${\vec A}^\mu$, are, respectively, described by ${\cal L}_{\pi}$ and 
222: ${\cal L}_{g}$. 
223: 
224: We firstly calculate the second-order energy correction to the nucleon or delta mass.  
225: The energy shift of a multi-quark, ground state, $|0 \rangle$, due to the interaction is given by 
226: the Hubbard's prescription 
227: %
228: \bge
229: E-E_0 = \langle 0 | \sum_{m=1}^\infty (-i)^m \frac{1}{m!} \int i\delta(t_1) d^4x_1 \cdots \int d^4x_m 
230: T[{\cal H}_{int}(x_1) \cdots {\cal H}_{int}(x_m)] | 0 \rangle_{con.} ,  \label{hubbard}
231: \ene
232: %
233: where ${\cal H}_{int}$ is the interaction Hamiltonian density.  
234: The energy shift is then given as $E^{(2)} = E_{dr} + E_{nd}$, 
235: where the first term is the direct contribution and the second one is the non-direct contribution. 
236: (See Eqs.(\ref{direct}) and (\ref{nondirect}) later.)
237: 
238: The noninteracting, quark green function is given by 
239: $iG^0(r,r^\prime) = \langle 0 | T[\psi(r){\bar \psi}(r^\prime)] | 0 \rangle$, and it can be separated into two pieces: 
240: $G^0(r,r^\prime) = \int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi} e^{-i\omega(t-t^\prime)} 
241: [G^0_F({\vec r},{\vec r\,}^\prime, \omega) + G^0_D({\vec r},{\vec r\,}^\prime, \omega)]$. 
242: The first term is the usual Feynman propagator in a spherical cavity (bag) and 
243: the second one describes the occupied, multi-quark ground state~\cite{chin} 
244: %
245: \bge
246: G^0_D({\vec r},{\vec r\,}^\prime, \omega) = \sum_{n\leq n_F} 
247: U_n({\vec r}){\bar U}_n({\vec r\,}^\prime) 2\pi i \delta(\omega - E_n) ,  \label{qgreenD}
248: \ene
249: %
250: where $U_n$ is the positive energy state with a complete set of quark 
251: quantum numbers $n (=\{ \nu \kappa \mu \mu_i \mu_c \})$ including isospin $\mu_i$ and color $\mu_c$ 
252: ($n_F$ specifies the quantum numbers at the Fermi surface in a hadron). 
253: 
254: Here we restrict the expansion of the quark propagator to the ground state, 
255: i.e., $\nu =0$ and $\kappa = -1$. 
256: Such a truncation may be considered as a regularization of the 
257: quark propagator, where in flavor SU(2) the intermediate baryon states in loop diagrams are restricted to 
258: the nucleon and delta~\cite{inoue}. 
259: This is consistent with the idea of the CBM. Thus, we let $n$ label the spin, isospin and color $\{\mu \mu_i \mu_c\}$. 
260: 
261: The pion propagator is defined by 
262: $i\Delta_{ab}(r,r^\prime) = \langle 0 | T[\phi_a(r) \phi_b(r^\prime)] | 0 \rangle = i \delta_{ab} 
263: \Delta(r,r^\prime)$, where $(a, b)$ specifies the isospin. It is then given by the multipole expansion 
264: %
265: \bge
266: \Delta(r,r^\prime) 
267: = \sum_{\ell, m} \int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi} e^{-i\omega(t-t^\prime)} 
268: \Delta_\ell(r,r^\prime, \omega) Y_{\ell m}({\hat r}) Y_{\ell m}^*({\hat r}^\prime) . \label{pgreen} 
269: \ene
270: %
271: %where $\Delta_\ell(r,r^\prime, \omega)$ is the radial part of the propagator. 
272: 
273: The gluon propagator can be calculated in the Coulomb gauge\footnote{
274: It can be shown that the result does not depend on the choice of the gauge~\cite{inoue}.} 
275: %
276: \bg
277: iD_{00}^{cd}(r,r^\prime) &=& i \delta_{cd} \int \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi)^4} 
278: \frac{e^{-i k\cdot(x-x^\prime)}}{{\vec k}^2} = i \delta_{cd} D_{00}(r,r^\prime) ,  \label{ggreen0} \\
279: iD_{ij}^{cd}(r,r^\prime) &=& i \delta_{cd} \int \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi)^4} 
280: \frac{e^{-i k\cdot(x-x^\prime)}}{{\vec k}^2 + i\epsilon} \left( \delta_{ij} - \frac{k_i k_j}{{\vec k}^2} \right) 
281: = i \delta_{cd} D_{ij}(r,r^\prime) ,  \label{ggreenT} 
282: \en
283: %
284: where $D_{00}^{cd}$ ($D_{ij}^{cd}$) represents the Coulomb (transverse) propagator, $(i,j) = 1, 2, 3$ and 
285: $(c, d)$ specifies the color. 
286: 
287: Using these propagators, the direct (or Hartree) contribution between two quarks is calculated by
288: %
289: \bge
290: E_{dr} = - \frac{1}{2} \int \!\!\! \int \delta(t_1) d^4r_1 d^4r_2 \, \Theta(r_1,r_2) \, 
291: {\rm tr}[\Gamma_1 {\vec t}_1\, G^0_D(r_1,r_1)] \cdot {\rm tr}[\Gamma_2 {\vec t}_2\, G^0_D(r_2,r_2)],  \label{direct}
292: \ene
293: %
294: where $\Gamma_{1, 2}$ represents the vertex (ps, pv or gluon) including the coupling constant 
295: (the Lorentz index is suppressed here), $\Theta$ stands for the pion or gluon propagator 
296: and ${\vec t} = {\vec \tau}/2$ or ${\vec \lambda}/2$.  The non-direct contribution is given by
297: %
298: \bge
299: E_{nd} = \frac{1}{2} \int \!\!\! \int \delta(t_1) d^4r_1 d^4r_2 \, \Theta(r_1,r_2) \, 
300: {\rm tr}[\Gamma_1 {\vec t}_1\, G^0(r_1,r_2) \cdot \Gamma_2 {\vec t}_2\, G^0(r_2,r_1)].  \label{nondirect}
301: \ene
302: %
303: This consists of the exchange contribution, $E_{ex}$, which is evaluated with $G^0=G^0_D$ in Eq.(\ref{nondirect}), and 
304: the self-energy contribution, $E_{qsf}$, where the pion is emitted and absorbed by the same quark. 
305: $E_{qsf}$ is calculated by replacing one of $G^0_D$'s with $G^0_F$ in $E_{ex}$.  
306: The case with simultaneously $G^0=G^0_F$ is removed, because it is the vacuum energy. 
307: The Hartree-Fock (HF) contribution between two quarks is defined by $E_{qHF} = E_{dr} + E_{ex}$.  
308: Note that these energy shifts correspond to the case where a closure approximation to the intermediate states is taken 
309: in the CBM, and that such an approximation is reasonable. 
310: 
311: For example, the HF result for the pv coupling, $E_{qHF}^{pv}$, is given by
312: %
313: \bg
314: E_{qHF}^{pv} &=& 
315: -\frac{[{\vec \sigma} {\vec t}\, ]_{HF} N^4}{12\pi^2 x^3 (f_\pi R)^2 R}   
316: \int_0^x d\rho_1 \rho_1^2 \int_0^x d\rho_2 \rho_2^2 \int_0^\infty \frac{dt \, t^4}{t^2+y^2} 
317: \biggl[ A(\rho_1) A(\rho_2) j_0(t\rho_1) j_0(t\rho_2)  \nonumber \\
318: &+& \frac{1}{3} 
319: \left\{ A(\rho_1) B(\rho_2) j_0(t\rho_1) \left( j_0(t\rho_2) -2 j_2(t\rho_2) \right) 
320: + A(\rho_2) B(\rho_1) j_0(t\rho_2) \left( j_0(t\rho_1) -2 j_2(t\rho_1) \right) \right\} \nonumber \\
321: &+& \frac{1}{9} B(\rho_1) B(\rho_2) \left( j_0(t\rho_1) -2 j_2(t\rho_1) \right) 
322: \left( j_0(t\rho_2) -2 j_2(t\rho_2) \right) \biggr] ,  \label{hfpv1}
323: \en
324: %
325: with $N$ the normalization constant for the quark wave function, $R$ the bag radius, 
326: $x$ the lowest quark eigenvalue, $y=m_\pi R/x$, 
327: $A(\rho) = j_0^2(\rho) - \beta^2 j_1^2(\rho)$, $B(\rho) = 2 \beta^2 j_1^2(\rho)$, 
328: $\beta = x/(\alpha+\delta)$, $\alpha^2 = x^2 + \delta^2$ and $\delta = mR$. 
329: Here the spin-isospin matrix element is given by~\cite{chin}
330: %
331: \bge
332: [{\vec \sigma} {\vec t}\, ]_{HF} = 
333: \sum_{i \neq i^\prime\in N, \Delta} \langle i| {\vec \sigma} {\vec t} |i^\prime \rangle \cdot \langle i^\prime| {\vec \sigma} 
334: {\vec t} |i \rangle 
335: = 9-S(S+1) - I(I+1) ,  \label{me1}
336: \ene
337: %
338: where the index ($i, i^\prime$) runs over the spin and isospin, and 
339: $S \, (I)$ is the total spin (isospin) of N or $\Delta$. 
340: Because the intermediate baryon states are restricted to the lowest mode, the self-energy contribution, $E_{qsf}^{pv}$, has 
341: the same form as the HF result except for the spin-isospin matrix element: $[{\vec \sigma} {\vec t}\, ]_{sf} = 27/4$ for both N and 
342: $\Delta$. 
343: 
344: The pion-induced baryon self-energies should reproduce the correct, leading non-analytic (LNA) behavior of chiral 
345: perturbation theory ($\chi$PT)~\cite{lna}. 
346: The LNA contribution is associated with the infrared behavior of the baryon self-energy, and hence, for example, 
347: Eq.(\ref{hfpv1}) gives $-3g_A^2m_\pi^3/(32\pi f_\pi^2) \times (30/25, 6/25)$ for the (N, $\Delta$) in the infrared limit. 
348: In contrast, $E^{pv}_{qsf}$ gives $-3g_A^2m_\pi^3/(32\pi f_\pi^2) \times 27/25$ for both N and $\Delta$. 
349: Thus, the total amount is $-3g_A^2m_\pi^3/(32\pi f_\pi^2) \times (57/25, 33/25)$ for the (N, $\Delta$), which is 
350: precisely the leading-order correction given by large $N_c$ $\chi$PT. 
351: However, because of the closure approximation 
352: taken for the intermediate states, the term of $m_\pi^4 \ln(m_\pi)$ does not appear in the present calculation. 
353: 
354: The contribution from the ps (gluon) interaction, $E_{qHF, qsf}^{ps} (E_{qHF, qsf}^{g})$, is also calculated 
355: in the similar manner.\footnote{
356: The energy shift due to the 
357: Coulomb propagator vanishes because of the color charge neutrality~\cite{mit}.
358: }
359: Note that there exists a nonvanishing, interference (sv) contribution between the ps and pv couplings, $E_{qHF, qsf}^{sv}$.  
360: %Numerically, the ps coupling is very small, because it is ${\cal O}(m^2/f_\pi^2)$. 
361: %The main energy shift comes from the pv coupling and its 
362: %magnitude is ${\cal O}(1/f_\pi^2 R^2)$. 
363: The pv, ps and gluon corrections lower the baryon mass, while 
364: the interference contribution increases it but its magnitude is ${\cal O}(m/f_\pi^2R)$ and thus small. 
365: 
366: Each correction is a function of the bag radius $R$, and, for example, $E_{qHF}^{pv}$ 
367: diverges like $ \sim - 1/R^3$ as $R \to 0$.  Thus, the bag collapses as 
368: $R \to 0$. 
369: %This can, however, be cured by introducing a non-local interaction between the quark and 
370: %pion. 
371: %The pion has a distinguishable property from the other hadrons, i.e., it is the only particle whose 
372: %geometrical size is smaller than its Compton wave length.  So, the elementary field 
373: %description of the pion field may be adequate at low energy (large scale).  However, 
374: Because the pion has a finite size, 
375: the effect of the $q{\bar q}$ substructure is essentially important when the bag 
376: radius is very small. 
377: In Ref.~\cite{saito}, a phenomenological, non-local interaction was studied 
378: to settle this collapse at $R \sim 0$. 
379: The effect of the $q{\bar q}$ substructure of pion can eventually be described by a form factor at the vertex of the 
380: quark-pion interaction. When the charge radius of the pion is about $0.56$ fm~\cite{dally}, 
381: the form factor is estimated as
382: %
383: \bge
384: F_{q\pi}(R) = \frac{1}{\left( 1+1.3\times (b / R)^2 \right)^{3/2}} ,  \label{f.f.}
385: \ene
386: %
387: with $b = 0.46$ fm (see Fig.2 in Ref.\cite{saito}).  
388: %Note that $F_{q\pi} \to R^3$ as $R \to 0$.  
389: %Multiplying the energy corrections due to the pion cloud by $F_{q\pi}^2(R)$, 
390: Using this form factor, one can get the finite, pion-loop contributions.  
391: 
392: The coupling between a quark and gluon is scale-dependent and the lowest-order coupling at 
393: momentum transfer $Q^2$ is 
394: $\alpha_s(Q^2) = g^2/4\pi = 12\pi/[(33-2N_f) \ln (Q^2/\Lambda_{QCD}^2)]$ 
395: with $N_f$ quark flavors and $\Lambda_{QCD} \simeq 200$ MeV.  
396: %As $Q \to \Lambda_{QCD}$, the coupling diverges, signaling the onset of confinement. 
397: %In the present model, because this effect has already been taken into account in the 
398: %bag model, we should take $\alpha_s(Q^2)$ to saturates at some critical value $\alpha_s^c$ as $Q \to 0$~\cite{capstick}. 
399: In practice, this behavior can be parametrized in a convenient form~\cite{capstick}
400: %
401: \bge
402: \alpha_s(Q^2) = \sum_{k} \alpha_k e^{-Q^2/4\gamma_k^2} 
403: = a_1 \, e^{-4Q^2} + 0.25\, e^{-Q^2} + 0.15 \, e^{-Q^2/10} 
404: + 0.2 \, e^{-Q^2/1000} ,  \label{alphac5}
405: \ene
406: %
407: where $Q^2$ in GeV$^2$ and the parameters, $\alpha_k$ and $\gamma_k$, except $a_1$ are constrained to follow the 
408: behavior of $\alpha_s(Q^2)$. We treat $a_1$ as a parameter. 
409: The form (\ref{alphac5}) is convenient, because it is 
410: easily transformed into the form in coordinate space 
411: %
412: \bge
413: \alpha_s(R) = \sum_{k} \frac{2\alpha_k}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_0^{\gamma_k R} e^{-x^2} dx .  \label{alphac4}
414: \ene
415: %
416: Here we assume that this gives the coupling constant at the scale of the bag radius, $R$, and that 
417: the energy shift due to the gluon exchange is given by replacing $g^2$ with $4\pi \alpha_s(R)$ in $E_{qHF, qsf}^{g}(R)$.  
418: Note that $\alpha_s(R) \to 0$ as $R \to 0$. %and that it weakens the gluon contribution near $R\sim 0$. 
419: 
420: Now we are in a position to present the numerical result for 
421: the N or $\Delta$ mass in free space.  The mass is given by a sum of the usual 
422: bag energy~\cite{mit} and the corrections due to the pion and gluon exchanges. 
423: We fix the current quark mass $m = 5$ MeV, because the dependence of the baryon mass on $m$ is very weak. 
424: There are four parameters: $B$, $z_N$, $z_\Delta$ and $a_1$ (in $\alpha_s$).  
425: Since we can expect that the usual $z$ parameter for the N is not much different from that for the $\Delta$, we 
426: choose $z_0 = z_N = z_\Delta$. Then, the bag constant, $B$, and $z_0$ are determined so as to fit 
427: the free nucleon mass, $M_N (= 939$ MeV), 
428: with its radius $R_N = 0.6$ or $0.8$ fm. 
429: The remaining parameter, $a_1$, is fixed so as to yield
430: the correct mass difference between $M_N$ and $M_\Delta (=1232$ MeV)
431: together with the pion-cloud contribution. 
432: We then find $B^{1/4} = 231.8 \, (183.7)$ MeV, $z_0 = 2.46 \, (1.17)$ and $a_1 = 5.01 \, (6.08)$ for $R_N = 0.6 \, (0.8)$ fm.
433: 
434: %
435: \begin{figure}
436: %\includegraphics[scale=1.3]{pion1}\\%[width=15cm,height=7cm,clip]
437: \includegraphics[scale=0.9]{EnergyShift.EPS}%[width=15cm,height=7cm,clip]
438: \caption{\label{fig:pion} 
439: Energy shift due to the HF contribution ($R_N=0.8$ fm). 
440: The dot-dashed curve presents the gluon contribution, which approaches a constant as $R \to 0$. 
441: The solid (dashed) [dotted] curve is for the ps (pv) [sv] contribution from the pion exchange.  
442: }
443: \end{figure}
444: %
445: \begin{table}[h]
446: \caption{\label{tab:energyshift} Energy shift (in MeV) due to the pion or gluon exchange.}
447: \begin{ruledtabular}
448: \begin{tabular}{cccccc}
449:  & $R$(fm) & $E_{qHF}^{pv+ps+sv}$ & $E_{qsf}^{pv+ps+sv}$ & $E_{qHF}^g$ & $E_{qsf}^g$ \\
450: \hline
451: N        & 0.6  & -89.5 & -80.5 & -111.1 & -333.3 \\
452: $\Delta$ & 0.611 & -17.7 & -79.7 & 110.7 & -332.0 \\
453: \hline
454: N        & 0.8  & -68.3 & -61.5 & -120.0 & -360.1 \\
455: $\Delta$ & 0.823 & -13.7 & -59.1 & 119.4 & -358.1 \\
456: \end{tabular}
457: \end{ruledtabular}
458: \end{table}
459: %
460: In Table~\ref{tab:energyshift}, we present the energy corrections. 
461: The N-$\Delta$ mass difference mainly comes from 
462: the gluon-exchange HF contribution. 
463: Note that the N-$\Delta$ mass difference due to the pion cloud is 
464: about $60$ MeV (for $R_N = 0.8$ fm), and that is near the upper limit 
465: allowed from lattice QCD constraints~\cite{young}.  
466: %
467: %\begin{figure}
468: %\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{vertex}%[width=15cm,height=7cm,clip]
469: %\caption{\label{fig:vertex} 
470: %Vertex corrections to the $\sigma$-quark and $\omega$-quark interactions. }
471: %\end{figure}
472: %
473: In Fig.~\ref{fig:pion}, for example, we show the HF energy due to the pion or gluon exchange 
474: as a function of the bag radius. As expected, the ps contribution is quite small. 
475: The interference is also small and its sign is positive. Because of Eqs.(\ref{f.f.}) and (\ref{alphac4}), 
476: the energy shift is finite everywhere and thus the total energy for the N or $\Delta$ mass has (global) one minimum at a certain $R$. 
477: 
478: To describe a nuclear matter, we need the intermediate attractive and short-range repulsive nuclear forces. 
479: As the QMC model is based on the one-boson-exchange (OBE) picture~\cite{qmc}, it is achieved by introducing 
480: the $\sigma$ and $\omega$ mesons.\footnote{
481: It should be noticed that the OBE model is still the most economical and quantitative 
482: phenomenology for describing the nuclear force~\cite{mach}.
483: } 
484: However, the present $\sigma$ meson is chirally singlet and {\em not} the chiral partner of the $\pi$ meson.  
485: This $\sigma$ represents, in some way, the exchange of two pions in the iso-scalar channel~\cite{delorme}. 
486: 
487: Now let us start from the following Lagrangian density for 
488: the ``chiral quark-meson coupling (CQMC) model'': 
489: ${\cal L}_{CQMC} = {\cal L}_{CBM} + {\cal L}_{\sigma \omega}$, 
490: where 
491: %
492: \bge
493: {\cal L}_{\sigma \omega} = {\bar \psi} \left[ g_\sigma^q \sigma - g_\omega^q \gamma_0 \omega \right] \psi \, \theta_V  
494: - \frac{1}{2} m_\sigma^2 \sigma^2 + \frac{1}{2} m_\omega^2 \omega^2 ,  \label{qmc-lag2}
495: \ene
496: %
497: with $g_\sigma^q (g_\omega^q)$ the $\sigma (\omega)$-quark coupling constant, $m_\sigma (m_\omega)$ the meson mass 
498: and $\sigma (\omega)$ the mean-field value of the $\sigma$ ($\omega$) meson. 
499: %Because the quark is dressed by the pion cloud, the pion-loop diagrams may contribute to the interaction vertices 
500: %(see Fig.~\ref{fig:vertex}).  When we take the mean-field approximation for the $\sigma$ and $\omega$ mesons, 
501: %such effect can be, however, absorbed into the coupling constant (at zero momentum transfer). 
502: 
503: In an iso-symmetric nuclear matter, the total energy per nucleon is given by
504: %
505: \bge
506: E_{tot} = \frac{4}{(2\pi)^3 \rho_B} \int^{k_F} d{\bf k} \sqrt{{\bf k}^2+M_N^{*2}} + 3g_\omega^q \omega 
507: + \frac{1}{2}( m_\sigma^2 \sigma^2 - m_\omega^2 \omega^2 ) ,  \label{tot}
508: \ene
509: %
510: with $\rho_B = 2k_F^3/3\pi^2$ and $M_N^{*}$ the effective nucleon mass. 
511: The attractive force due to the $\sigma$ changes the quark mass in matter as 
512: $m^* = m - g_\sigma^q \sigma$ ($m^*$ the effective quark mass), which modifies the quark wave function. 
513: This modification generates the effective nucleon mass, $M_N^{*}$, in matter. 
514: Because the change of the quark wave function varies the source of the $\sigma$ field, 
515: we have to solve the coupled, nonlinear equations for the nuclear matter self-consistently 
516: (for details, see Refs.\cite{qmc}).  
517: %Note that, depending on $\rho_B$, the $\pi$-N coupling also varies self-consistently through $F_{q\pi}(R)$. 
518: 
519: %
520: \begin{table}[h]
521: \caption{\label{tab:cqmc} Coupling constants and calculated properties for symmetric nuclear matter at $\rho_0$. 
522: The last three columns show the relative changes (from their values at zero density) of the bag radius, the lowest eigenvalue 
523: and the root-mean-square (rms) radius of the nucleon calculated with 
524: the quark wave function. 
525: The nucleon mass and the nuclear incompressibility, $K$, are in MeV.}
526: \begin{ruledtabular}
527: \begin{tabular}{cccccccc}
528: $R_N$(fm) & $g_\sigma^2/4\pi$ & $g_\omega^2/4\pi$ & $M_N^*$ & $K$ & $\delta R_N^*/R_N$ & $\delta x^*/x$ & $\delta r^*/r$ \\
529: \hline
530: 0.6 & 6.11 & 10.20 & 632 & 362 & 0.01 & -0.18 & 0.05 \\
531: 0.8 & 4.93 & 9.59 & 647 & 365 & 0.02 & -0.22 & 0.07 \\
532: \end{tabular}
533: \end{ruledtabular}
534: \end{table}
535: %
536: \begin{figure}
537: \includegraphics[scale=1.0]{ScalarPolarizability.EPS}%[width=15cm,height=7cm,clip]
538: \caption{\label{fig:scalarpol} 
539: Scalar polarizability in the CQMC model (for $R_N=0.8$ fm). 
540: The dashed curve presents the scalar polarizability in the usual QMC model, while the solid one is for the CQMC model. 
541: The dotted (dot-dashed) curve shows the pion (gluon) contribution to the scalar polarizability. 
542: }
543: \end{figure}
544: %
545: The numerical result for the nuclear matter 
546: (with $m_\sigma = 550$ MeV, $m_\omega = 783$ MeV and $R_N = 0.6$ or $0.8$ fm) is presented in Table~\ref{tab:cqmc}. 
547: The $\sigma$-N and $\omega$-N coupling constants, 
548: $g_\sigma (= 3g_\sigma^q S(\sigma=0))$ and $g_\omega (= 3g_\omega^q)$, are determined to fit 
549: the nuclear saturation condition ($-15.7$ MeV) at normal nuclear density $\rho_0 (= 0.15$ fm$^{-3}$). 
550: Here $S(\sigma)$ is the scalar density calculated by the quark wave function~\cite{qmc}. 
551: 
552: In the CQMC model, the bag radius is swelled by a few percent at $\rho_0$. 
553: The quark eigenvalue, $x$, decreases by about $20$\%, which leads to 
554: the smaller in-medium nucleon mass than in the QMC model. Although the rms radius of a nucleon swells by about 
555: $6$\% at $\rho_0$, it may still be within the experimental constraint~\cite{electron}.  
556: 
557: In Fig.~\ref{fig:scalarpol}, we present the scalar polarizability in the CQMC model, which is given by a sum of 
558: the quark scalar density, $S(\sigma)$, and the contributions from the pion and gluon exchanges. 
559: We find that even in the CQMC model the scalar polarizability decreases with increasing $\rho_B$. 
560: Because of this reduction of the scalar polarizability in matter, the present model can achieve 
561: the nuclear saturation property with a much smaller value of the nuclear incompressibility, $K$, than in QHD.  
562: %As in the QMC model, the CQMC model can also describe the nuclear matter well. 
563: 
564: %
565: \begin{figure}
566: \includegraphics[scale=0.9]{ga_pt.eps}%[width=15cm,height=7cm,clip]
567: \caption{\label{fig:ga} 
568: Variation of $g_A$ in matter (for $R_N=0.8$ fm). }
569: \end{figure}
570: %
571: In Fig.~\ref{fig:ga}, as an example, we show the axial vector coupling constant, $g_A$, in matter. 
572: If the pion is massless, the pion pole term 
573: in the axial vector current gives just $1/3$ of 
574: the quark core contribution 
575: i.e., the MIT-bag-model value~\cite{chin,tsushima}. 
576: However, when the pion is massive, 
577: the pion current does not contribute to $g_A$. 
578: Here the quark core contribution is thus calculated with the corrections 
579: due to the Peierls-Thouless projection method 
580: and the Lorentz contraction of the bag~\cite{tsushima}.  We obtain $g_A = 1.15$ in free space. 
581: The CQMC predicts a reduction of about $14$\% for $g_A$ at $\rho_0$. 
582: Note that the pion field surrounding a nucleon becomes 
583: also weaker with increasing $\rho_B$ since 
584: the pion itself is mainly generated by the pv interaction. 
585: 
586: In the present model, of importance is the scalar polarizability. 
587: It describes the response of a quark to the scalar field in matter 
588: and leads to the reduction of the $\sigma$-N coupling constant~\cite{qmc,formf}.  Such response arises from the change of the quark 
589: wave function in a medium, and it is thus the many-body effect~\cite{skyrme}. 
590: Then, the CQMC predicts that the iso-scalar, central force is weakened depending on $\rho_B$. 
591: On the other hand, in EFT, the (supposed) $\sigma$ exchange in the OBE model can be well understood by 
592: the correlated, two-pion contribution~\cite{kaiser1,donoghue}. 
593: However, recent calculations for matter show that, 
594: the N$^3$LO potential based on EFT produces 
595: very deep overbinding at large $\rho_B$~\cite{li}.  
596: Thus, this reduction of the central force may be favorable. 
597: To draw more definite conclusions, however, further studies are necessary.
598: 
599: %The iso-scalar, central potential is then expressed in terms of $g_A$, $c_1$ and $c_3$, where 
600: %$c_i$ ($i=1 \sim 4$) are the LECs in the next-to-leading order term of the effective chiral $\pi N$ lagrangian~\cite{kaiser1}. 
601: %The LEC $c_3$ is also related to the nucleon axial polarizability~\cite{ericson}.
602: %Furthermore, 
603: %the $c_1$ part of the central potential is proportional to the nucleon scalar form factor (or the $q{\bar q}$ condensate), 
604: %which may also vary in matter~\cite{sigmaterm}.  The LEC $c_3$ is related to the so-called nucleon axial polarizability, 
605: %while $c_4$ is given in terms of the nucleon isovector magnetic form factor~\cite{electron}. 
606: %Thus, the present CQMC approach is very promising to predict how the LECs vary depending on $\rho_B$. 
607: %For more practical purposes, 
608: %it is possible to 
609: %construct a point-coupling model of nuclear matter based on in-medium chiral perturbation theory, in which the 
610: %nucleon self-energies are expanded in terms of $\rho_B$ up to ${\cal O}(k_F^5)$.  The coefficients appearing in the expansion are 
611: %then determined so as to fit the results of Dirac-Brueckner calculations.  The QMC may also be able to explain 
612: %why the coefficients are such values. 
613: 
614: In summary, we have developed for the first time a chiral version of 
615: the quark-meson coupling model based on the cloudy bag model, in which 
616: the effects of pion cloud and gluon exchange are included self-consistently.
617: The model can describe a symmetric nuclear matter reasonably well. 
618: We have also shown that $g_A$ decreases with increasing $\rho_B$. 
619: This implies that the iso-scalar, central nuclear force 
620: should be weakened in matter. 
621: At ${\cal O}(1/f_\pi^2)$, the CBM Lagrangian automatically 
622: provides the Weinberg-Tomozawa (WT) term, 
623: %${\cal L}_{WT} = - (1/4f_\pi^2) {\bar \psi} \gamma_\mu \tau \psi ({\vec \phi} \times \partial^\mu {\vec \phi}) \theta_V$,  
624: which is a new source of $g_A$~\cite{morgan,tsushima}. 
625: Thus, in the future, it is desirable to perform a self-consistent calculation 
626: up to ${\cal O}(1/f_\pi^2)$ including the WT term.
627: %the magnitude of the WT correction is proportional to the product of the upper and lower components of the 
628: %quark wave function~\cite{morgan} and it thus increases as the density grows.  
629: %However, $g_A$ eventually decreases in matter 
630: %because the WT contribution is expected to be smaller than the quark core contribution. 
631: %Using the CQMC model, it is very intriguing and the challenge to precisely calculate the density dependence of 
632: %the LECs, $g_A$ etc. appearing in EFT. 
633: It is also very interesting to compare the CQMC with the EFT approach 
634: to investigate the internal 
635: structure change of the nucleon in medium. 
636: 
637: %
638: \begin{acknowledgements}
639: The authors thank A.W. Thomas for valuable discussions on the pion-cloud effect. 
640: This work was supported by Academic Frontier Project (Holcs, Tokyo University of Science, 2005) of MEXT, 
641: and by the US Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Physics, through contract no. DE-AC05-06OR23177, 
642: under which Jefferson Science Associates, LLC, operates Jefferson Lab.
643: \end{acknowledgements}
644: %
645: 
646: %\clearpage
647: %
648: %%%%%%%%%%%%% Bibliography %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
649: %
650: %\newpage
651: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
652: %
653: \bibitem{qmc} P.A.M. Guichon, Phys. Lett. B200 (1988) 235; \\
654: K. Saito, A.W. Thomas, Phys. Lett. B327 (1994) 9; \\
655: K. Saito, K. Tsushima, A.W. Thomas, Phys. Rev. C55 (1997) 2637; 
656: Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 58 (2007) 1. 
657: %
658: \bibitem{mach} For a recent review, R. Machleidt, nucl-th/0710.2940.
659: %
660: \bibitem{lepage} For example, G.P. Lepage, nucl-th/9706029.
661: %
662: \bibitem{mach2} R.D. Entem, R. Machleidt, Phys. Rev. C66 (2002) 014002; C68 (2003) 041001.
663: %
664: \bibitem{density} M. Lutz, B. Friman, Ch. Appel, Phys. Lett. B474 (2000) 7; \\
665: S. Fritsch, N. Kaiser, W. Weise, Nucl. Phys. A750 (2005) 259.
666: %
667: \bibitem{jlab} S. Strauch (Hall A collaboration), 
668: {\it Proc. of the Fifth Int. Workshop on Neutrino-Nucleus Interactions in the Few-GeV Region (NuInt07)}, nucl-ex/0709.4034.
669: %
670: \bibitem{emc} J.R. Smith, G.A. Miller, Phys,. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 212301; Phys. Rev. C 70 (2004) 065205. 
671: %
672: \bibitem{skyrme} %P.A.M. Guichon, A.W. Thomas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 132502; \\
673: P.A.M. Guichon, H.H. Matevosyan, N. Sandulescu, A.W. Thomas, Nucl. Phys. A772 (2006) 1. 
674: %
675: %\bibitem{jaffe} R.L. Jaffe, Erice Summer School, {\it Ettore Majorana} Lecture (1979).
676: %
677: \bibitem{tony} A.W. Thomas, J. Phys. G7 (1981) L283; Adv. Nucl. Phys. 13 (1984) 1.
678: %
679: \bibitem{chin} S.A. Chin, Nucl. Phys. A382 (1982) 355.
680: %
681: \bibitem{inoue} T. Inoue, V.E. Lyubovitskij, Th. Gutsche, A. Faessler, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E15 (2006) 121.
682: %
683: \bibitem{lna} A.W. Thomas, G. Krein, Phys. Lett. B456 (1999) 5; \\
684: D.B. Leinweber, A.W. Thomas, K. Tsushima, S.V. Wright, Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 074502. 
685: %
686: \bibitem{mit} T. DeGrand, R.L. Jaffe, K. Johnson, J. Kiskis, Phys. Rev. D12 (1975) 2060. 
687: %
688: \bibitem{saito} K. Saito, Prog. Theor. Phys. (Kyoto) 71 (1984) 775. 
689: %
690: \bibitem{dally} E.B. Dally {\it et al}, Phys. Rev. D24 (1981) 1718. 
691: %
692: \bibitem{capstick} S. Capstick, N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D34 (1986) 2809. 
693: %
694: \bibitem{young} R.D. Young, D.B. Leinweber, A.W. Thomas, S.V. Wright, Phys. Rev. D66 (2002) 094507. 
695: %
696: \bibitem{delorme} J. Delorme, M. Ericson, P.A.M. Guichon, A.W. Thomas, Phys. Rev. C61 (2000) 025202. 
697: %
698: \bibitem{electron} R.D. Mckeown, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56 (1986) 1452; \\
699: D.H. Lu, A.W. Thomas, K. Tsushima, A.G. Williams, K. Saito, Phys. Lett. B417 (1998) 217. 
700: %
701: \bibitem{tsushima} K. Tsushima, T. Yamaguchi, Y. Kohyama, K. Kubodera, Nucl. Phys. A489 (1988) 557; \\
702: D.H. Lu, A.W. Thomas, K. Tsushima, nucl-th/0112001 (unpublished); \\
703: K. Tsushima, Hungchong Kim, K. Saito, Phys. Rev. C70 (2004) 038501.
704: %
705: \bibitem{formf} K. Saito, K. Tsushima, Phys. Lett. B575 (2003) 4. 
706: %
707: \bibitem{kaiser1} N. Kaiser, R. Brockmann, W. Weise, Nucl. Phys. A625 (1997) 758. 
708: %P. Finelli, N. Kaiser, D. Vretenar, W. Weise, Nucl. Phys. A735 (2004) 449.
709: %
710: \bibitem{donoghue} J.F. Donoghue, Phys. Lett. B643 (2006) 165; Phys. Rev. C74 (2006) 024002.
711: %
712: \bibitem{li} Z.H. Li, U. Lombardo, H.-J. Schulze, W. Zuo, L.W. Chen, H.R. Ma, Phys. Rev. C74 (2006) 047304; \\
713: P. Saviankou, S. Krewald, E. Epelbaum, Ulf-G. Meissner, nucl-th/0802.3782. 
714: %
715: %\bibitem{sigmaterm} K. Tsushima, K. Saito, A.W. Thomas, A. Valcarce, Eur. Phys. J. A31 (2007) 626; \\
716: %
717: \bibitem{morgan} M.A. Morgan, G.A. Miller, A.W. Thomas, Phys. Rev. D33 (1986) 817. 
718: %
719: %\bibitem{ericson} M. Ericson, A. Figureau, J. Phys. G7 (1989) 1197; \\
720: %K. Saito, A.W. Thomas, Phys. Rev. C51 (1995) 2757. 
721: %
722: 
723: 
724: 
725: 
726: 
727: \end{thebibliography}
728: %
729: 
730: 
731: %\newpage %Just because of unusual number of tables stacked at end
732: %\bibliography{apssamp}% Produces the bibliography via BibTeX.
733: 
734: 
735: \end{document}
736: %
737: % ****** End of file apssamp.tex ******
738: