1: % Upper-case A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
2: % Lower-case a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z
3: % Digits 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
4: % Exclamation ! Double quote " Hash (number) #
5: % Dollar $ Percent % Ampersand &
6: % Acute accent ' Left paren ( Right paren )
7: % Asterisk * Plus + Comma ,
8: % Minus - Point . Solidus /
9: % Colon : Semicolon ; Less than <
10: % Equals = Greater than > Question mark ?
11: % At @ Left bracket [ Backslash \
12: % Right bracket ] Circumflex ^ Underscore _
13: % Grave accent ` Left brace { Vertical bar |
14: % Right brace } Tilde ~
15:
16: \documentstyle{vciart}
17:
18: \begin{document}
19:
20: \input{epsf.tex}
21:
22: \begin{frontmatter}
23:
24:
25: \title{EVIDENCE FOR A NARROW STRUCTURE AT W$\sim$1.68 GEV
26: IN $\eta$ PHOTOPRODUCTION OFF THE NEUTRON }
27:
28:
29: \vspace{0.5 cm}
30:
31: \author[knu,inr,cat] {V.Kuznetsov\thanksref{slava}},
32: \author[inr] {S.Churikova},
33: \author[tor] {G. Gervino},
34: \author[san] {F. Ghio},
35: \author[san] {B. Girolami},
36: \author[inr] {D.Ivanov},
37: \author[knu] {J.Jang},
38: %\author[inr] {D.Karapetiantz},
39: \author[knu] {A.Kim},
40: \author[knu] {W.Kim},
41: \author[knu] {A.Ni},
42: \author[inr] {Yu.Vorobiev},
43: \author[knu] {M.Yurov},
44: \author[inr] {and A.Zabrodin}.
45:
46: \address[knu] {Kyungpook Natioanal University, 1370 Sankyuk-dong, Puk-ku, Daegu, Republic of Korea}
47: \address[inr] {Institute for Nuclear Research, 117312 Moscow, Russia}
48: \address[cat] {INFN Laboratori Nazionali del Sud and Universit\`a di Catania,
49: 95123 Catania,Italy}
50: \address[tor] {Dipartimento do Fisica Sperimentale, Universit\`a di Torino and INFN Sezione di Torino, 10125 Torino,Italy}
51: \address[san] {INFN sezione Sanit\`a and Istituto Superiore di Sanit\`a,00161 Roma, Italy}
52:
53:
54: \thanks[slava]{E-mail: Slava@cpc.inr.ac.ru, SlavaK@jlab.org}
55:
56:
57: \date{\today}
58:
59:
60: %-------------abstract----------------
61:
62: \begin{abstract}
63:
64: New results on quasi-free $\eta$ photoproduction
65: on the neutron and proton bound in a deuteron target are presented.
66: The $\gamma n \rightarrow \eta n$ quasi-free cross section
67: reveals a bump-like structure which is not seen in the
68: cross section on the proton. This structure may signal the existence
69: of a relatively narrow ($M\sim 1.68$ GeV, $\Gamma \leq 30$ MeV) baryon state.
70:
71: \end{abstract}
72:
73: %----------end of abstract-------------
74:
75: \end{frontmatter}
76:
77:
78: Despite the availability of modern precise
79: experimental data, the complete spectrum of baryons is not yet well established.
80: Among 43 nucleon and Delta resonances predicted
81: by QCD-inspired models, almost half have yet to be
82: experimentally identified (``missing" resonances)\cite{pdg}.
83: Quantum chromodynamics may also allow for more complicated quark systems
84: containing, for example, an additional quark-antiquark pair $q \bar q$
85: (pentaquarks). The existence (or non-existence) of
86: this type of particles is another challenge for both theory
87: and experiment.
88:
89: Much of our knowledge on the baryon spectrum was obtained through
90: pion-nucleon scattering and meson photoproduction
91: off the proton. Meson photoproduction off the neutron may offer a unique
92: tool to study certain baryons which have still not been firmly established.
93: Some resonances are predicted to be exclusevely photoexcited from neutrons
94: and not from protons\cite{hey}. For example, a single-quark transition model\cite{mok}
95: suggests only weak photoexcitation of the $D_{15}(1675)$ resonance
96: from the proton target. On the other hand, photocouplings to the neutron
97: calculated in the framework of this approach are not small.
98:
99: The possible photoexcitation of a non-strange
100: pentaquark state (if it exists) is of high interest as well.
101: This particle is associated with the second nucleon-like member of
102: an antidecuplet of exotic baryons\cite{dia,jafw}.
103: Evidence for the lightest member of the antidecuplet, the $\Theta^+(1540)$ baryon,
104: is now being widely debated\cite{bur}. A benchmark signature of the non-strange
105: pentaquark could be its photoproduction on the nucleon.
106: %Exact $SU(3)_F$ would forbid the proton photoexcitation into the
107: %proton-like antidecuplet member.
108: The chiral soliton model predicts that photoexcitation of the non-strange pentaquark
109: has to be suppressed on the proton and should occur mainly on the neutron\cite{max}.
110: %even after accounting for $SU(3)_F$ violation\cite{max}.
111: The mass of the non-strange pentaquark is expected
112: to be near 1.7 GeV\cite{jafw,dia1,str}, with a total width of about 10 MeV
113: and a partial width for the $\pi N$ decay mode, less than 0.5 MeV\cite{str}.
114:
115: Among various reactions, $\eta$ photoproduction off the neutron
116: is particularly attractive because
117: i) it selects only isospin $I=\frac{1}{2}$ final states;
118: ii) there is enough accurate data for the ``mirror" $\gamma p \to \eta p$ reaction;
119: iii) this reaction was considered as particularly sensitive to the signal
120: of the non-strange pentaquark~\cite{jafw,max,dia1,str}.
121: Up to now $\eta$ photoproduction off the neutron has been explored
122: mostly in the region of the $S_{11}(1535)$ resonance from threshold
123: up to $W \sim 1.6$ GeV\cite{inc}.
124: The ratio of cross sections, $(\gamma n \rightarrow \eta
125: n)$/$(\gamma p\rightarrow\eta p)$, was found
126: to be nearly constant, with a value near $\sim$0.67. At higher energies,
127: the GRAAL Collaboration has reported a sharp rise of this ratio\cite{nstar2002}.
128:
129: \begin{figure}[ht]
130: \centerline{\epsfxsize=5.5in\epsfbox{ttt.eps}}
131: \caption{ Bi-dimensional spectra of invariant mass of two photons (X axis) versus
132: missing mass $MM(\gamma N,N)$ calculated from momenta of recoil nucleons
133: and the incoming photon (Y axis) for proton and deuteron targets.
134: \label{Fig1}}
135: \end{figure}
136:
137: In this Letter we present the analysis of data collected
138: at the GRAAL facility\cite{pi0} in 2002.
139: Both quasi-free $\gamma n \rightarrow \eta n$ and
140: $\gamma p \rightarrow \eta p$ reactions were explored
141: simultaneously, in the same experimental run, under the same conditions
142: and solid angle using a deuteron target.
143: Two photons from $\eta \rightarrow 2\gamma$ were detected in the BGO
144: ball\cite{bgo}. The $\eta$-mesons were identified by means of their
145: invariant mass, with momentum reconstructed from the measured
146: photon energies and angles. Recoil nucleons (neutrons or protons)
147: were detected in two sets of detectors:\\
148: i) Neutrons and protons emitted at forward angles
149: $\theta_{lab}\leq 23^{\circ}$, passed through two planar
150: multiwire chambers, a time-of-flight (TOF) hodoscope made of thin
151: scintillator strips, and a lead-scintillator sandwich TOF
152: wall\cite{rw}. The latter detector provides the detection of neutrons with
153: an angular resolution of $2-3^{\circ}$(Full Width at a
154: Half of Maximum), and a TOF resolution of $600-800 ps$ (FWHM). TOF measurement
155: makes it possible to discriminate neutrons from photons
156: and to reconstruct neutron momenta;\\
157: ii) Recoil nucleons emitted at central angles $\theta_{lab}\geq 26^{\circ}$,
158: were detected in the BGO ball\cite{bgo}. This detector provides partial
159: discrimination of neutrons from photons and no TOF measurement.
160: The neutron energy was obtained using kinematics constraints.
161:
162: Fig.~1 shows bi-dimensional plots of the $\gamma\gamma$ invariant mass versus
163: the missing mass $MM(\gamma N,N)$ calculated from the momentum of
164: the recoil nucleon (proton or neutron) and the momentum of the
165: incoming photon. The plots have been obtained using data collected
166: in experimental runs with proton and deuteron targets. A peak
167: with coordinates ($X=m_{\eta}$, $Y=m_{\eta}$)
168: corresponds to $\eta N$ photoproduction. A good $\eta p$ signal was
169: obtained with the proton target, while only a few $\eta n$ events
170: appeared in this run. Signals of both final states are clearly seen
171: with the deuteron target.
172:
173: \begin{figure}[ht]
174: \centerline{\epsfxsize=5.5in\epsfbox{mism1.eps}}
175: \caption{Spectra of $MM(\gamma n,\eta)$ missing mass at photon energies $0.95 \leq E_{\gamma} \leq 1.2$ MeV (left panel) and $1.2 \leq E_{\gamma} \leq 1.5$ MeV (right panel). Upper curves correspond to initial selection. Lower curves indicate events after the cuts except the cut on $MM(\gamma n,\eta)$. Dashed areas show finally selected events.
176: \label{Fig_mm}}
177: \end{figure}
178:
179: As a first step of the analysis,
180: the identification of the $\eta n$ and $\eta p$
181: final states was achieved in a way similar to that used in the
182: previous measurements\cite{gra2} on the free proton.
183: The measured parameters of the recoil nucleon were compared with
184: ones expected assuming a quasi-free reaction in which the photon interacts
185: with only one nucleon bound in the deuteron while the second nucleon
186: acts as a spectator.
187:
188: At photon energies above 950 MeV, the background
189: from $\gamma N \to \eta X N$ was observed. This background was clearly
190: seen in the spectrum of the $MM(\gamma N, \eta)$ missing mass in which it
191: appeared as the second bump shifted to higher mass region from
192: the position of the main peak at 0.94 GeV~(Fig.\ref{Fig_mm}). To reject this background,
193: the cut on $MM(\gamma N, \eta)$ was imposed. In case of the neutron
194: detection in the BGO ball, this cut was added by lower and upper limits
195: on the BGO signal attributed to a neutron hit
196: $0.014$ GeV$\leq \Delta E \leq 0.5*T_n$. The latter cut was found efficient to
197: discriminate between neutrons and accidental low-energy photons emitted
198: as secondary particles in the detector volume, and high-energy
199: photons produced in background reactions.
200:
201: In the case of a photon interaction with a nucleon bound in the deuteron,
202: event kinematics is ``peaked" around that on a free
203: nucleon. Fermi motion of the target nucleon changes the effective energy of
204: photon-nucleon interaction and affects momenta of outgoing
205: particles. It also complicates discrimination of the
206: background. Some events may suffer from re-scattering and
207: final-state interaction\cite{kudr}. Such events might generate an artificial
208: structure in the cross section due to specific effects like virtual
209: sub-threshold meson production followed by an interaction with the
210: spectator nucleon~\cite{il}.
211:
212: The goal of the second stage of the analysis was to minimize
213: any influence of re-scattering, final-state interaction, or background
214: contamination. Here, we used the sample of events in which
215: the recoil neutrons/protons were detected in the forward detectors.
216: The strategy at this stage was to study the dependence of the spectra
217: of selected events on cuts. The recoil nucleon missing mass $MM(\gamma N, \eta)$,
218: $TOF_{meas}-TOF_{exp}$, and $\theta_{meas}- \theta_{exp}$ selection windows
219: were reduced by a factor 2-3.
220: Tight cuts preferably reject re-scattering, final-state interaction,
221: and the remaining background.
222: They also suppress those events whose kinematics is strongly distorted by Fermi
223: motion or in which one or more parameters of the outgoing particles are not
224: properly measured, due to detector response.
225:
226: Four types of spectra were considered at this stage: \\
227: i) The spectrum of the center-of-mass energy $W$ calculated from the momentum
228: of the initial-state photon and assuming the target nucleon
229: to be at rest $W=\sqrt{(E_{\gamma}+M_N)^2-E_{\gamma}^2}$.
230: This quantity ignores Fermi motion and is
231: peaked around the effective center-of-mass energy (40-60 MeV(FWHM) depending
232: on the energy of the incoming photon). \\
233: ii) The spectrum of the center-of-mass energy reconstructed as the
234: invariant mass of the final-state $\eta$ and the nucleon
235: $M(\eta N$). This quantity is much less smeared by Fermi motion (about 2 MeV(FWHM))
236: but includes large uncertainties due to instrumental resolution ($40-60$ MeV(FWHM)).\\
237: iii) Distribution of the momentum for the spectator nucleon,
238: reconstructed as the ``missing" momentum from the momenta of the final-state
239: $\eta$ and nucleon and the momentum of the incoming photon;\\
240: iv) Difference between the final-state $M(\eta N)$ invariant mass and
241: the initial-state center-of-mass energy $W$.
242:
243: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%FIG.2%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
244: \begin{figure}[ht]
245: \vspace*{-0.9cm}
246: %\centerline{\epsfxsize=3.5in\epsfbox{fn2p22.jpg}}
247: %\hspace{0.2 cm} \psfig{file=fn2p22.eps,width=2.2in,angle=0}
248: %\hspace{-0.2 cm} \psfig{file=feta2p22.eps,width=2.2in,angle=0}
249: \centerline{\epsfverbosetrue\epsfxsize=13cm\epsfysize=14cm\epsfbox{fn2fig1.eps}}
250: %\hspace{0.1cm}{\epsfverbosetrue\epsfxsize=6.85cm\epsfysize=7.1cm\epsfbox{feta2pict22.eps}}
251:
252: \vspace*{0.2cm}
253: \caption{$\gamma n \rightarrow \eta n$ data.
254: Spectra of center-of-mass energy, calculated as
255: invariant mass of final-state $\eta$ and the nucleon (left
256: columns), from the energy of the incoming photon and assuming
257: the target nucleon to be at rest (second columns), momentum
258: of the spectator nucleon (third columns), and difference between
259: final-state and initial-state center-of-mass energies(fourth
260: columns). Upper rows correspond to initial selection, middle
261: rows show spectra after tight cuts, lower rows
262: show events rejected by tight cuts.
263: \label{fig:g1}}
264: \end{figure}
265: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
266:
267: The upper row of
268: Fig.~\ref{fig:g1} shows the $M(\eta n)$
269: (first column) and W (second column) spectra
270: obtained with the initial cuts. Both exhibit a shoulder-like
271: bump in the region of 1.6 - 1.7 GeV on the slope of the $S_{11}(1535)$
272: resonance. The spectator-momentum (third column) and the
273: $M(\eta n) - W$ distributions (fourth column) are relatively broad.
274: Plots in the middle row correspond to the tight cuts.
275: Here the spectator-momentum spectrum is more compressed. The $M(\eta n) - W$
276: spectrum is more narrow and is localized near 0. The bumps observed
277: in the previous $M(\eta n)$ and $W$ spectra, become more pronounced and
278: are transformed into peaks near $1.68$ GeV. Conversely, events rejected
279: by the second-level cuts (lower row) form a broader spectator-momentum
280: distribution with the maximum near 0.1 GeV/c. The $M(\eta n) - W$
281: difference contains two maxima, both shifted from 0. The $M(\eta n)$ and $W$
282: spectra show some hints on lateral peaks.
283:
284: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%FIG.3%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
285: \begin{figure}[ht]
286: \vspace*{-0.9cm}
287: %\centerline{\epsfxsize=3.5in\epsfbox{fn2p22.jpg}}
288: %\hspace{0.2 cm} \psfig{file=fn2p22.eps,width=2.2in,angle=0}
289: %\hspace{-0.2 cm} \psfig{file=feta2p22.eps,width=2.2in,angle=0}
290: \centerline{\epsfverbosetrue\epsfxsize=13cm\epsfysize=14cm\epsfbox{feta2fig1.eps}}
291: %\hspace{0.1cm}{\epsfverbosetrue\epsfxsize=6.85cm\epsfysize=7.1cm\epsfbox{feta2pict22.eps}}
292:
293: \vspace*{0.2cm}
294: \caption{$\gamma p \rightarrow \eta p$ data.
295: The legend is the same as for the Fig.~\ref{fig:g1}.
296: \label{fig:g1a}}
297: \end{figure}
298: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
299:
300: The same procedure was applied to the quasi-free $\gamma p \to \eta p$ reaction
301: (Fig.~\ref{fig:g1a}). The spectator momentum and $M(\eta p) - W$
302: spectra are similar to those obtained on the neutron. However, the $M(\eta N)$ and $W$
303: spectra are smooth and exhibit no structure.
304:
305: Evolution of spectra in Fig.~\ref{fig:g1},~\ref{fig:g1a} suggests that most of events rejected
306: by the second-level cuts either strongly suffer from Fermi motion and/or
307: detector response, or possibly originate from re-scattering and
308: final-state interaction. However, events shown in the middle-row
309: plots, correspond to quasi-free reactions. These spectra clearly reveal
310: a peak at 1.68~GeV in $\eta$ photoproduction on the neutron
311: which is not seen on the proton.
312:
313:
314:
315: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%FIG.4%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
316: \begin{figure}[ht]
317: \vspace {-0.2cm}
318: %\centerline{\epsfxsize=5.0in\epsfbox{fn2p41b.eps}}
319: %\centerline{
320: %\psfig{file=f0a.eps,width=4.0in,clip=0,silent=,angle=0}
321: %}
322: {\centerline\epsfverbosetrue\epsfxsize=14.0cm\epsfysize=10.cm\epsfbox{fign3.eps}}
323: %\vspace*{2.3 cm}
324: \caption{ Quasi-free differential cross-section
325: at different angles .
326: Left panel: $\gamma n \rightarrow \eta n$.
327: Right panel: $\gamma p \rightarrow \eta p$.
328: Solid lines are $\eta$-MAID
329: predictions for $\eta$ photoproduction on the free neutron/proton
330: folded with Fermi motion. Dashed line is E429 solution of the SAID
331: $\gamma p \to \eta p$ partial wave analysis folded with
332: Fermi motion.
333: \label{fig:cr2}}
334: %\vspace*{-0.5cm}
335: \end{figure}
336: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
337:
338:
339:
340: The measured quasi-free differential cross sections for $\eta n$ and $\eta p$
341: photoproduction are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cr2}.
342: The common normalization for both protons and neutrons was done by comparing
343: quasi-free proton data at backward angles with the E429 solution of the SAID $\gamma
344: p\to\eta p$ partial-wave analysis\cite{str2} and $\eta$ - MAID prediction\cite{maid}
345: for $\eta$ photoproduction on the free proton, which were folded with Fermi
346: motion (upper row, right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:cr2}).
347: The measured spectra of events were corrected on the simulated detection efficiency
348: and on the beam spectrum.
349: In addition the spectra of $\gamma n \to \eta n$ events were corrected on the difference
350: between the measured and simulated efficiencies of the neutron detection.
351: The neutron detection efficiency was determined using the previous data
352: for the $\gamma p \to \pi^+ n$ reaction\cite{gra1}.
353: It was found to be about 22\% for the shower wall
354: and 27\% for the BGO ball being dependent the neutron energy, on the pulse height
355: thresholds set for both detectors, and on cuts used to identify neutrons.
356: The obtained distributions were then scaled by a common constant factor.
357: The latter was determined requesting the minimum of the difference
358: between quasi-free proton data at backward angles and the SAID and MAID solutions.
359: The region of backward angles was chosen for the normalization
360: because of the coincidence in shapes of
361: the cross section on the proton and the SAID and MAID solutions
362: (top right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:cr2}). This coincidence hints a small role
363: of nuclear effects at these angles. At more forward angles,
364: re-scattering and final-state interaction seem to become more significant
365: reaching $\sim30$\% in the region of the $S_{11}(1535)$ resonance.
366: Error bars shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cr2} correspond to
367: statistical uncertainties only. The normalization uncertainty
368: of 10\% originates mostly from the quality of simulations of quasi-free processes
369: and from uncertainties in determining the neutron detection efficiency.
370:
371:
372: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%FIG.5%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
373: \begin{figure}[ht]
374: %\vspace*{0.7 cm}
375: \centerline{\epsfverbosetrue\epsfxsize=13.5cm\epsfysize=11.5cm\epsfbox{fn2main16.eps}}
376:
377: \caption{Polynomial-plus-narrow-state fit of $\gamma n \to \eta n$ cross sections.
378: Black circles are $\gamma n \to \eta n$ data. Open circles correspond to $\gamma p \to \eta p$
379: cross section normalized on the cross section on the neutron in the maximum of the
380: $S_{11}(1535)$ resonance. Dashed areas show simulated contribution of the narrow state.
381: Solid lines are the result of the fit. Dashed lines show the fit by 3-order polynomial only.
382: \label{fig:cr3}}
383: %\vspace{-0.3cm}
384: \end{figure}
385: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
386:
387: The cross section on the neutron clearly reveals
388: a bump-like structure\footnote{ The cross section
389: obtained with tight cuts exhibit a slightly more narrow structure
390: but includes larger statistical and systematic errors.
391: For the sake of clarity and reliability in our conclusions it is not shown.}
392: near $W \sim 1.68 $ GeV. This structure looks slightly wider at forward angles.
393: The visible width of the peak at forward angles is about $80-100$ MeV(FWHM)
394: (or $rms= 35 - 40$ MeV).
395: The data have been compared with an isobar model for
396: $\eta$ photo- and electroproduction $\eta - MAID$\cite{maid}.
397: The model includes 8 main resonances and suggests the dominance of the
398: $S_{11}(1535)$ and $D_{15}(1675)$ resonances in $\eta$ photoproduction
399: off the neutron below $W\sim 1.75 $ GeV.
400: The model predicts a bump-like structure near $W \sim 1.7$ GeV
401: in the total $\eta$ photoproduction cross section on the
402: neutron\cite{tia}. This structure is caused by the $D_{15}(1675)$ resonance.
403: The $\eta$ - MAID differential cross sections are
404: smooth (Fig.~\ref{fig:cr2}, left panel). The PDG estimate for the $D_{15}(1675)$ $\eta N$
405: branching ratio $\frac{\Gamma_{\eta N}}{\Gamma_{total}}$ is close to 0 while the value included into
406: $\eta$-MAID is 17\%\cite{tia}. The PDG average
407: for the Breit-Wigner width of this resonance is
408: $\Gamma \sim 150$ MeV\cite{pdg}. The structure observed in the quasi-free cross section
409: looks more narrow.
410: %Comparison of $\eta$-MAID with beam asymmetry data
411: %is ambiguous (Fig.~\ref{fig:sig}).
412:
413: It is well known that $\eta$ photoproduction on the
414: proton is dominated by photoexcitation of the $S_{11}(1535)$ resonance up to $W \sim 1.68 $ GeV.
415: At higher energies, the increasing role of higher-lying resonances is expected \cite{gra2,etap}.
416: $\eta$ photoproduction on the neutron is dominated by the $S_{11}(1535)$
417: up to $W \sim 1.62$ GeV\cite{inc,nstar2002}. The shape of cross sections on the neutron and
418: on the proton in the region $S_{11}(1535)$ resonance below $W\sim 1.62$ GeV is similar
419: (Fig.~\ref{fig:cr3}). One may assume that the enhancement in the cross section on the neutron
420: at $W\sim 1.62 - 1.72 $ GeV is caused by an additional relatively narrow resonance.
421: In Fig.~\ref{fig:cr3} the simulated contribution of a narrow state ($M\sim1.68$ GeV, $\Gamma = 10$ MeV)
422: is shown. This state appears as a wider bump in the quasi-free cross section due to
423: Fermi motion of the target neutron.
424: The neutron cross section in the range of $W\sim 1.55 - 1.85$ GeV is well fit by the sum
425: of a third-order polynomial and a narrow state, with an overall $\chi^2$ about 11/14, 8/14 and 11/14 for the backward, central and forward angles respectively. The fit by only a third-order polynomial increases $\chi^2$ to about 31/15, 21/15, and 23/15.
426:
427: Thus, the apparent width of the structure in the $\gamma n \rightarrow \eta n$ cross
428: section is not far from one expected due to smearing by Fermi motion.
429: The same structure was observed in the $M(\eta n)$ invariant mass spectra(Fig.~\ref{fig:g1}).
430: The width of the peaks in the $M(\eta n)$ spectra is also close to experimental
431: resolution. Therefore this structure may signal the existence of a relatively
432: narrow $(\Gamma \leq 30$ MeV) state. If so, its properties, the possibly narrow width and the strong photocoupling to the neutron, are certainly unusual.
433: There are six well-known nucleon resonances
434: in this mass region\cite{pdg}: $S_{11}(1650)$, $D_{15}(1675)$, $F_{15}(1680)$,
435: $D_{13}(1700)$, $P_{11}(1710)$, and $P_{13}(1720)$. Among them $D_{15}(1675)$ was predicted to have stronger photocouplings to the neutron\cite{hey,mok}. One cannot exclude that the observed
436: structure might be a manifestation of one of them or might originate from the intereference
437: between several resonances. On the other hand, such a state coincides with the expectation of the chiral soliton model\cite{max,dia1} and a modified PWA\cite{str} for the non-strange pentaquark\footnote{Here we note that the recent negative reports on the search for the $\Theta(1540)$ pentaquark\cite{clas} put doubts on the existence of the exotic antidecuplet and the non-strange pentaquark.}.
438:
439: The possible role of some resonances has been recently examined in Ref.~\cite{tia,kim,skl} on the base of our\cite{nstar2004} and CB-TAPS\cite{kru} preliminary reports. In the standard $\eta$-MAID model the $D_{15}(1675)$ resonance produces a bump near $W \sim 1.68$ GeV in
440: the total $\eta$-photoproduction cross section on the neutron.
441: The unusually large branching ratio of $D_{15}(1675)$ to $\eta N$
442: is needed to reproduce experimental data.
443: %This violates $SU(3)$ bounds\cite{max1} for $\beta_{\eta N}=17$ and is in contradiction
444: %with the PDG quotation.
445: The inclusion of a narrow $P_{11}(1675)$ resonance with parameters suggested in \cite{max} into $\eta$-MAID generates a narrow peak in the cross section on the free neutron while the cross section on the free proton remains almost unaffected. The peak is transformed into a wider bump similar to experimental observation if Fermi motion is taken into account\cite{tia}. The similar result has been obtained in Ref.~\cite{kim}. Authors of \cite{skl} have demonstrated that the peak at $W\sim1.67 GeV$ in the $\eta$-photoproduction cross section on the neutron can be explained in terms of the $S_{11}(1650)$ and $P_{11}(1710)$ resonance excitation.
446: % with appropriate helicity amlitudes $^{n}A_{\frac{1}{2}}$.
447: %The signature of this approach is the rise of differential cross sections on the
448: %neutron at backward angles in the region of $W \sim 1.64 - 1.73$ GeV.
449:
450: The decisive identification of the observed structure requires a complete partial-wave analysis based on a fit to experimental data. New beam asymmetry data
451: from GRAAL and cross sections from the CB/TAPS Collaboration\cite{kru} and
452: from Laboratory of Nuclear Sciences of Tohoku University\cite{kas}
453: are expected to enlarge the data base. The problem is that such analysis requires a fit to quasi-free data smeared by Fermi motion and distorted by re-scattering and final-state interaction.
454: The use of the beam asymmetry $\Sigma$ is going to be even more sophisticated: considerable theoretical effort is needed to understand the interaction of polarized photons with bound nucleons\cite{sib}. More perspective seems to search for the traces of this state in reactions
455: of the free proton. Another way is to study the $\gamma n \to \eta n$ reaction
456: in experiments with the detection of the spectator proton, and/or
457: in double-polarization experiments with parallel/antiparallel beam-target polarisations.
458: A spin-1/2 state would be seen only with antiparallel (helicity-1/2) beam-target polarisations. Such dedicated experiments could be carried out at JLAB and the upgraded ELSA and MamiC facilities.
459:
460: It is a pleasure to thank the staff of the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility
461: (Grenoble, France) for stable beam operation during the experimental run.
462: We thanks Y.~Azimov, K.~Goeke, and M.~Polyakov for the valuable
463: theoretical contribution in support of this work, R.~Workman and I.~Strakovsky
464: for the assistance in preparation of a manuscript.
465: Discussions with W.~Briscoe, V.~Burkert, D.~Diakonov, A.~Dolgolenko, I.~Jeagle, H.-~C.Kim,
466: M.~Kotulla, B.~Krusche, A.~Kudryavtsev, V.~Mokeev, E.~Pasyuk,
467: P.~Pobylitsa, M.~Ripani, A.~Sibirtsev, I.~Strakovsky, M.~Tauti,
468: L.~Tiator and R.~Workman were very helpful. This work has been
469: supported by Universit\`a degli studi di Catania and Laboratori Nazionale
470: del Zud, INFN Sezione di Catania (Italy),
471: and by Ruhr-Universit\"at Bochum (Germany).
472:
473:
474: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
475:
476: \begin{thebibliography}{10}
477: \bibitem{pdg} S.Eidelman \textit{et al.}, \textit{Phys. Lett.}
478: B\textbf{592}, 1 (2004).
479: \bibitem{hey} A.J.G.Hey and J.Weyers, \textit{Phys. Lett.}
480: B\textbf{48}, 69 (1974).
481: \bibitem{mok} V.~Burkert \textit{et al.}, \textit{Phys. Rev. C} \textbf{67},
482: 035205 (2003).
483: \bibitem{dia} D.~Diakonov, V.~Petrov, and M.~Polyakov, \textit{Z. Phys. A}
484: \textbf{359}, 305 (1997).
485: \bibitem{jafw}R.~Jaffe and F.~Wilczek, \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{91},
486: 232003 (2003) [hep-ph/0307341].
487: \bibitem{bur} V.~Burkert, hep-ex/0510309, and
488: references therein.
489: \bibitem{max} M.~Polyakov and A.~Rathke \textit{Eur. Phys. J A} \textbf{18},
490: 691 (2003) [hep-ph/0303138]; H.~C.~Kim \textit{et al.},
491: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71} (2005) 094023,[arXiv:hep-ph/0503237].
492: \bibitem{dia1}D.~Diakonov and V.~Petrov, \textit{Phys. Rev. D} \textbf{69},
493: 094011 (2004) [hep-ph/0310212].
494: \bibitem{str} R.~Arndt \textit{et al.}, \textit{Phys. Rev. C} \textbf{69},
495: 0352008 (2004) [nucl-th/0312126].
496: \bibitem{inc} B.~Krusche \textit{et al.}, \textit{Phys. Lett. B} \textbf{358},
497: 40 (1995); V. Heiny \textit{et al.}, \textit{Eur. Phys. J. A} \textbf{6},
498: 83 (2000); J. Wei\ss\ \textit{et al.}, \textit{Eur. Phys. J.
499: A} \textbf{16}, 275 (2003) [nucl-ex/0210003];
500: P. Hoffman-Rothe \textit{et al.}, \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.}
501: \textbf{78}, 4697 (1997).
502: \bibitem{nstar2002} V.Kouznetsov \textit{ et al.}, Proceedings of
503: Workshop on the Physiscs of Excited Nucleons NSTAR2002,
504: Pittsburgh, USA, October 9 - 12 2002,
505: Ed. E.Swanson, World Scientific, 2003, pg.267-270.
506: \bibitem{pi0} General description of the GRAAL facility is in
507: V.Bellini \textit{et al.}, \textit{Eur. J. A.}
508: \textbf{26}, 299 - 419 (2006).
509: \bibitem{bgo} F. Ghio {\it et al.}, {\it Nucl. Inst. and Meth. A}
510: {\bf 404}, 71, 1998.
511: \bibitem{rw} V. Kouznetsov {\it et al.}, {\it Nucl. Inst. and
512: Meth. A} {\bf 487}, 128, 2002.
513: \bibitem{gra1} O.Bartalini \textit{et al.} Phys. Lett. B\textbf{544}, 113 (2002),
514: [hep-ex/0207010].
515: \bibitem{gra2}J.~Ajaka \textit{et al.}, \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{81}, 1787(1998);
516: F.~Renard \textit{et al.}, \textit{Phys. Lett. B} \textbf{528}, 215 (2002).
517: \bibitem{maid} W.-T.Chiang, S.-N.Yang,L.Tiator, and D.Drechsel,
518: \textit{Nucl. Phys} A \textbf{700}, 426 (2002), [hep-0110034],
519: http://www.kph.uni-mainz.de.
520: \bibitem{kudr}A. Baru, A.Kudryavtsev, and V. Tarasov, {\it Phys.
521: Atom. Nucl.} {\bf 67} 743, 2004, arXiv:nucl-th/0301021;
522: A. Sibirtsev, S. Schneider, and C. Elster, {\it Phys.
523: Rev. C} {\bf 65}, 067002 (2002), arXiv:nucl-th/0203039;
524: A. Fix and H. Arenhovel, {\it Phys. Rev. C} {\bf 68},
525: 44002 (2003), arXiv:nucl-th/0203039; and references
526: therein.
527: \bibitem{etap}M.~Dugger \textit{et al.}, \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.}
528: \textbf{89}, 222002 (2002); V.~Crede \textit{et al.},
529: \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{94}, 012004(2004)
530: [hep-ex/0311045].
531: \bibitem{il} Y.~Ilieva \textit{et al.},\textit{Nucl. Phys. A} \textbf{737},
532: S158 (2004), [nucl-ex/0309017].
533: \bibitem{str2} R.~A.~Arndt, W.~J.~Briscoe, I.~I.~Strakovsky, and
534: R.~L.~Workman, in
535: progress, \hbox{http://gwdac.phys.gwu.edu}.
536: \bibitem{clas} M.~Battaglieri \textit{et al.}(CLAS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.
537: \textbf{96}, 042001 (2006), [hep-ex/0510061]; C.Niccolai
538: \textit{et al.}(CLAS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{97},
539: 032001 (2006), [hep-ex/0604047].
540: \bibitem{tia} L.~Tiator, Talk at Work on $\eta$-Nucleus Physics, May 8 - 12, 2006,
541: Julich, Germany, [nucl-th/0610114].
542: \bibitem{kim} K.-~S.~Choi, S.~Nam., A.~Hosaka, and H.-~C.~Kim, \textit{Phys. Lett.}
543: B\textbf{636}, 253 (2006), [hep-ph/0512136].
544: \bibitem{skl} V.~Shklyar, A.~Leshke, and U.~Mozel, [nucl-th/0611036].
545: \bibitem{nstar2004} V.~Kuznetsov \textit{et al.}, Proceedings of Workshop on
546: the Physics of Excited NSTAR2004, Grenoble, March 2004, World Scientific 2004,
547: pg. 197, [hep-ex/0409032]; V.Kuznetsov \textit{et al.}, Proceedings of
548: Nucleons NSTAR2005, Tallahassee, FL, USA, October 2005, World Scientific 2006,
549: [hep-ex/0601002].
550: \bibitem{kru} J.~Jaegle, Talk at Workshop on the Physics of Excited
551: Nucleons NSTAR2005, Tallahassee, FL, USA, October 12 - 15 2005.
552: \bibitem{kas} J.Kasagi, Talk at Yukawa International Seminar YKIS2006,
553: November 20 - December 2006, Kyoto, Japan,
554: http://www2.yukawa.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~ykis06/.
555: %\bibitem{max1} V.Gusey and M.Polyakov, [hep-ph/0512355].
556: %\bibitem{fant} Publication in preparation.
557: \bibitem{sib} A.~Sibirtsev, Talk at Workshop on eta photoproduction, Bochum,
558: Germany, February 12 - 15 2006.
559: \end{thebibliography}
560:
561: \end{document}
562: