1: %\documentstyle[aps,multicol,epsf]{revtex}

2: \documentstyle[aps,epsf]{revtex}

3: %

4: \newcommand{\figsize}{10 cm}

5: 

6: \input epsf

7: \begin{document}

8: 

9: \title{Random matrix model for chiral symmetry breaking and color

10:   superconductivity in QCD at finite density.\thanks{An animated gif movie

11:     showing the evolution of the phase diagram with the chiral and diquark

12:     coupling parameters can be viewed at

13:     http://www.nbi.dk/\~{}vdheyden/QCDpd.html}}

14: 

15: \author{Beno\^\i t Vanderheyden and A. D. Jackson \\

16: The Niels Bohr Institute, Blegdamsvej 17, DK-2100 Copenhagen \O, Denmark.}

17: 

18: \date{\today}

19: 

20: \maketitle

21: 

22: \begin{abstract}

23:   

24:   We consider a random matrix model which describes the competition between

25:   chiral symmetry breaking and the formation of quark Cooper pairs in QCD at

26:   finite density. We study the evolution of the phase structure in

27:   temperature and chemical potential with variations of the strength of the

28:   interaction in the quark-quark channel and demonstrate that the phase

29:   diagram can realize a total of six different topologies.  A vector

30:   interaction representing single-gluon exchange reproduces a topology

31:   commonly encountered in previous QCD models, in which a low-density chiral

32:   broken phase is separated from a high-density diquark phase by a

33:   first-order line.  The other five topologies either do not possess a

34:   diquark phase or display a new phase and new critical points.  Since these

35:   five cases require large variations of the coupling constants away from the

36:   values expected for a vector interaction, we conclude that the phase

37:   diagram of finite density QCD has the topology suggested by single-gluon

38:   exchange and that this topology is robust.

39: 

40: \end{abstract} 

41: 

42: \section{Introduction}

43: 

44: A number of early and recent model studies of finite density

45: QCD~\cite{Bar77,BaiLov84,AlfRaj98,RapSch98} have suggested that quark Cooper

46: pairs may form above some critical density and lead to `color

47: superconducting' matter.  Although perturbation theory performed on

48: single-gluon exchange suggests pairing gaps of a few MeV~\cite{BaiLov84},

49: some recent calculations including non-perturbative interactions, either in

50: the form of the Nambu Jona-Lasinio (NJL)

51: model~\cite{AlfRaj98,BerRaj99,SchKle99,low}  or those induced by

52: instantons~\cite{RapSch98,CarDia99}, indicate gaps as large as $100$ MeV.

53: Theses values imply that color superconductivity may be relevant to the

54: physics of heavy-ion collisions and neutron stars.

55: 

56: Quark pairing singles out one color direction and thus spontaneously breaks

57: $SU(3)_{\rm color}$ to $SU(2)_{\rm color}$. The pattern of symmetry breaking

58: may however be richer, since the formation of condensates in one $\langle qq

59: \rangle$ channel competes with the breaking of chiral symmetry in the

60: orthogonal $\langle \bar q q\rangle$ channel.  In an earlier

61: paper~\cite{VanJac99} we formulated random matrix models for both chiral and

62: diquark condensations in the limit of two quarks flavors and zero chemical

63: potential. Our aim was to understand the phase structures which result from

64: the competition between the two forms of order solely on the basis of the

65: underlying symmetries. In this spirit, we constructed random matrix

66: interactions for which the single quark Hamiltonian satisfies two basic

67: requirements: (1) its block structure reflects the color $SU(N_c)$ and chiral

68: $SU(2)_{\rm L} \times SU(2)_{\rm R}$ symmetries of QCD and (2) the single

69: quark Hamiltonian is Hermitian. This last condition ensures the existence of

70: well-defined relationships between the order parameters and the spectral

71: properties of the interactions. In particular, condition (2) is obeyed by

72: single-gluon exchange, which is generally regarded as the relevant

73: description of QCD. Aside from conditions (1) and (2), the dynamics of the

74: interactions does not contain any particular structure.  In order to solve

75: the model exactly, we described this ``dynamics'' by independent Gaussian

76: distributions of matrix elements.

77:  

78: In practice, what distinguishes the interactions from one another is their

79: respective coupling constants, $A$ and $B$, in the $\langle qq \rangle$ and

80: $\langle \bar q q \rangle$ channels. The ratio $B/A$ measures the balance

81: between chiral and diquark condensation forces. The absolute magnitudes of

82: $A$ and $B$ play a secondary role. They introduce a scale in the condensation

83: fields but do not affect the phase structure. We have shown

84: in~\cite{VanJac99} that the condition (2) of Hermiticity forces $B/A$ to be

85: smaller or equal to $N_c/2$. This constraint results in the absence of a

86: stable diquark phase in the limit of zero chemical potential.

87: 

88: The purpose of this paper is to extend our previous analysis to non-zero

89: chemical potentials, for which the interactions cease to be Hermitian.

90: Non-Hermitian interactions lead to considerable difficulties in numerical

91: calculations in both lattice and random matrix theories.  Standard Monte

92: Carlo techniques fail because the fermion determinant in the action is

93: complex and the sampling weights are no longer positive definite. Obtaining

94: reliable results thus requires a proper treatment of cancellations between a

95: large number of terms; a problem which has not yet found a satisfactory

96: solution~\cite{Biel,Ste96,KogMat83,BarBeh86,KogLom95,BarMor97}.  The

97: present random matrix models possess exact solutions.  The saddle-point

98: methods  used in~\cite{VanJac99} to derive the free-energy as a

99: function of the condensation fields remain valid at finite densities and give

100: exact results in the thermodynamic limit of matrices of infinite dimensions.

101: Here, we will use these methods to calculate the thermodynamics quantities as

102: a function of the condensation fields and deduce the phase diagrams from the

103: field configurations which maximize the pressure.

104: 

105: We will discover that the pressure function has a simple analytic dependence

106: which leads to polynomial gap equations. This situation reminds us of the gap

107: equations obtained in a Landau-Ginzburg theory near criticality, and the

108: random matrix approach is analogous in many respects.  Both theories

109: associate a change of symmetry with a change of state in the system.  They

110: are both mean-field and describe the dynamics of a reduced number of degrees

111: of freedom $N$, where $N$ scales with the volume of the system. In random

112: matrix models, these degrees of freedom can be related to the low-lying quark

113: excitation modes in the gluon background, i.e. the zero modes in an instanton

114: approximation of that background~\footnote{This relation is explicit in the

115:   random matrix models where only chiral symmetry is

116:   considered~\cite{ShuVer93,Ver94,Ver99}; it is expected to remain true once

117:   color symmetry is also taken into account~\cite{VanJac99}.}. In the

118: Landau-Ginzburg formulation, the degrees of freedom correspond to the

119: long-wavelength modes which remain after coarse-graining. There is, however,

120: an essential difference in the construction of the two theories. A

121: Landau-Ginzburg theory starts with the specification of an effective

122: potential for the relevant degrees of freedom. A random matrix model starts

123: at a more microscopic level with the construction of an interaction which,

124: once integrated over, produces an effective potential.  The integration can

125: carry along dynamical constraints and thus restricts the allowed range of

126: coupling constants.  An example of such restriction is the Hermiticity

127: condition in~\cite{VanJac99}, which implies that $B/A \le N_c/2$.  This

128: condition is characteristic of the dynamics of the interactions which we

129: consider and remains true at finite chemical potential. We will therefore

130: take it into account in the following.

131: 

132: In this paper, we consider random matrix models in which both chiral and

133: color condensations can take place and study the resulting phase diagrams in

134: temperature and chemical potential. We review the model of

135: Ref.~\cite{VanJac99} and discuss the general form of the pressure as a

136: function of the condensation fields in Sec.~\ref{s:models}. We then solve the

137: gap equations and analyze the six topologies that the phase diagram can

138: assume in Sec.~\ref{s:pd}.  We compare our results with those of QCD

139: effective models, discuss the possibility of other symmetry breaking patterns

140: and the extension to the case of non-zero quark current masses in

141: Sec.~\ref{s:discuss}.  Section~\ref{s:conclusions} presents our conclusions.

142: 

143: \section{Formulation of the model}

144: \label{s:models}

145: 

146: \subsection{The partition function}

147: \label{ss:models}

148: 

149: The generalization of the matrix models introduced in Ref.~\cite{VanJac99} to

150: finite quark densities is straightforward. We represent the quark fields for

151: each of the two flavors by $\psi_1^{\phantom \dagger}$ and $\psi_2^{\phantom

152:   \dagger}$. The partition function at temperature $T$ and chemical potential

153: $\mu$ is then

154: \begin{eqnarray}

155: && Z(\mu,T) = \int {\cal D}H\,{\cal D}\psi_1^\dagger\, {\cal

156:   D}\psi_1^{\phantom\dagger}

157: \,{\cal D}\psi_2^T\,{\cal D}\psi_2^* \nonumber \\

158: && \times \exp{\left[i \left( \begin{array}{c}

159:         \psi_1^\dagger \\

160:         \rule{0pt}{1ex} \\

161:         \psi_2^T

162:        \end{array}

163: \right)^T 

164: \left( \begin{array}{cc}

165:           {\cal H} + \left(\pi T+ i \mu\right) \gamma_0 + i m & 

166:                    {\eta P_\Delta}\\

167:           \rule{0pt}{1ex} & \rule{0pt}{1ex} \\

168:           -\eta^* P_\Delta& 

169:                    -{\cal H}^T + \left(\pi T-i \mu\right) \gamma_0^T - i m 

170:        \end{array}

171: \right)

172: \left( \begin{array}{c} 

173:        \psi_1^{\phantom\dagger} \\

174:        \rule{0pt}{1ex} \\

175:        \psi_2^*

176:        \end{array}

177: \right)

178: \right].} 

179: \label{partfunc}

180: \end{eqnarray} 

181: Here, ${\cal H}$ is a matrix of dimension $4 \times N_c \times N$ which

182: represents the interaction of a single quark with a gluon background. Its

183: measure, ${\cal D} H$, will be discussed below.  The parameters $m$ and

184: $\eta$ select a particular direction for chiral and color symmetry breaking

185: and are to be taken to zero in the appropriate order at the end of the

186: calculations.  The current quark mass $m$ is to be associated with the chiral

187: order parameters $\langle \psi^\dagger_1 \psi_1^{\phantom \dagger} \rangle$

188: and $\langle \psi^T_2 \psi_2^* \rangle$.  The complex parameter $\eta$ is to

189: be associated with the order parameter for Cooper pairing, $\langle \psi_2^T

190: P_\Delta \psi_1^{\phantom \dagger} \rangle$, in which $P_\Delta \equiv i C

191: \gamma_5 \lambda_2$ ($C$ is the charge conjugation operator) selects the

192: quark-quark combinations which are antisymmetric in spin and color, i.e. a

193: chiral isosinglet, Lorentz scalar, and color $\bar 3$ state.  Note that in

194: order to permit the construction of correlations between the fields $\psi_1$

195: and $\psi_2^T$, we have transposed the single quark propagator in the second

196: flavor, hence the upperscript $T$.

197: 

198: The interaction ${\cal H}$ is intended to mimic the effects of gluon

199: fields and thus explicitly includes the desired chiral and color

200: symmetries. Of central interest is single-gluon exchange, which has the

201: chiral block-structure

202: \begin{eqnarray}

203: {\cal H_{\rm sge}}& = & \left(

204:                  \begin{array}{cc}

205:                     0         & W_{\rm sge} \\

206:                     W^\dagger_{\rm sge} & 0

207:                   \end{array}

208:               \right),

209: \label{chiralblock}

210: \end{eqnarray}

211: where $W_{\rm sge}$ has the spin and color block-structure of a vector

212: interaction,

213: \begin{eqnarray}

214: W_{\rm sge} & = & \sum_{\mu =1}^4 \sum_{a=1}^8 \sigma_\mu^+ \otimes \lambda^a \otimes

215: A^{\mu a}.

216: \label{W}

217: \end{eqnarray}

218: Here, $\sigma_\mu^+=(1,i\vec  \sigma)_\mu$ are  the $2\times2$ spin matrices,

219: and $\lambda_a$  denote the $N_c \times  N_c$ Gell-Mann matrices. The $A^{\mu

220:   a}$ are real $N \times N$ matrices which represent the gluon fields.

221: 

222: Since we want to explore the evolution of the phase structure as the balance

223: between chiral and diquark condensations is changed, we consider the larger

224: class of Hermitian interactions to which single-gluon exchange belongs. 

225: As noted in the introduction, this

226: choice is motivated by the fact that Hermitian interactions 

227: have a clear relationship between the order parameters and the

228: spectral properties, in the form of Banks-Casher formulae~\cite{BanCas80}.  

229: We write an Hermitian interaction ${\cal H}$ as an expansion into a direct

230: product of the sixteen Dirac matrices $\Gamma_C$ times the $N_c^2$ color

231: matrices. The matrix elements are given by

232: \begin{eqnarray}

233: {\cal H}_{\lambda i \alpha k;\kappa j \beta l}  & = &

234: \sum_{C=1}^{16} \left( \Gamma_C^{\phantom T} \right)_{\lambda i;\kappa j} 

235: \sum_{a=1}^{N_c^2} \Lambda^a_{\alpha\beta} 

236: \left(A^{C a}_{\lambda\kappa}\right)_{k l},

237: \label{calH}

238: \end{eqnarray}

239: where the indices ($\lambda$,$\kappa$), $(i,j)$, and $(\alpha,\beta)$

240: respectively denote chiral, spin, and color quantum numbers, while $(k,l)$

241: are matrix indices running from $1$ to $N$.  The $\Lambda^a$ represent the

242: color matrices $\lambda^a$ when $a \le N_c^2 -1$ and the diagonal matrix

243: $(\delta_c)_{\alpha\beta}=\delta_{\alpha\beta}$ when $a = N_c^2$. The

244: normalization for color matrices is ${\rm Tr}[\lambda^a \lambda^b]=2

245: \delta_{ab}$ and ${\rm Tr}[\delta_c^2]=N_c$; the normalization of the Dirac

246: matrices is ${\rm Tr}[\Gamma_C \Gamma_{C'}]=4 \delta_{C C'}$.

247: 

248: The random matrices $A^{Ca}$ are real when $C$ is vector or axial

249: vector ($C=V,A$) and real symmetric when $C$ is scalar, pseudoscalar, or

250: tensor $(C=S,P,T)$~\cite{VanJac99}. Their measure is

251: \begin{eqnarray}

252: {\cal D} H &=& \left\{\prod_{C a}\prod_{\lambda \kappa} {\cal

253: D}A^{Ca}_{\lambda\kappa}\right\} 

254: \exp\left[ - N \sum_{C a}

255: \sum_{\lambda\kappa}\,\beta_C\Sigma_{Ca}^2 \,\,{\rm Tr}

256: [A^{Ca}_{\lambda\kappa} (A^{Ca}_{\lambda\kappa})^T] \right],

257: \label{measure}

258: \end{eqnarray}

259: where ${\cal D}A^{Ca}_{\lambda \kappa}$ are Haar measures. Here, $\beta_C=1$

260: for $C=V,A$ and $\beta_C=1/2$ for $C=S,P,T$. We want to mimic interactions

261: which in a four-dimensional field theory would respect color $SU(N_c)$ and

262: Lorentz invariance in the vacuum. Therefore, we choose a single variance

263: $\Sigma_{Ca}$ for all channels which transform equally under color and space

264: rotations.

265: 

266: The temperature and chemical potential enter the model in Eq.~(\ref{Omega})

267: through the inclusion of the first Matsubara frequency in the single quark

268: propagator. Such $T$ and $\mu$ dependence is certainly oversimplified but none

269: the less sufficient to produce the desired physics. Our purpose is to

270: understand the general topology of the phase diagram and not to provide

271: explicit numbers.  More refined treatments including, for instance, all

272: Matsubara frequencies would modify the details of the phase diagram and map

273: every $(\mu,T)$ coordinate to a new one.  However, any such mapping will

274: necessarily be monotonic and will conserve the topology. We note in

275: particular that we do not assume a temperature dependence of the variances,

276: i.e. we neglect the $T$-dependence of the gluon background.  A non-analytic

277: behavior in $T$ should only arise in the contribution to the thermodynamics

278: from the degrees of freedom related to chiral and diquark condensations. We

279: thus expect a realistic $T$-dependence of the gluon background (and of the

280: variances) to be smooth and not to affect the overall phase topology.

281: 

282: We choose the signs of the $T$- and $\mu$-dependencies to mimic a diquark

283: condensate which is uniform in time, i.e. which does not contain a proper

284: pairing frequency. In a microscopic theory formulated in four-momentum space,

285: the absence of a proper frequency leads to pairing between particle and hole

286: excitations with energies which are symmetric around the Fermi surface. We

287: simulate this effect by selecting  opposite $T$-dependences for the fields

288: $\psi_1^{\phantom T}$ and $\psi^T_2$, while maintaining the same

289: $\mu$-dependence.

290: 

291: \subsection{The pressure function}

292: \label{s:pressure}

293: 

294: The integration over the random matrix interactions is Gaussian and can thus

295: be performed exactly. Following the procedure of Ref.~\cite{VanJac99}, we use

296: a Hubbard-Stratonovitch transformation to introduce two auxiliary variables

297: $\sigma$ and $\Delta$, to be associated with the chiral and pairing order

298: parameters respectively

299: \begin{eqnarray}

300: \sigma &\leftrightarrow& 

301: \langle \psi^\dagger\psi \rangle \equiv 

302: \langle \psi^\dagger_1 \psi^{\phantom \dagger}_1 \rangle =

303: - \langle \psi^T_2 \psi^{*}_2 \rangle, \nonumber \\

304: \Delta &\leftrightarrow& 

305: \langle \psi \psi \rangle \equiv

306: \langle \psi^T_2 P_\Delta \psi^{\phantom T}_1 \rangle = 

307: \left(\langle \psi^\dagger_1 P_\Delta \psi^*_2 \rangle\right)^*.

308: \label{HS}

309: \end{eqnarray}

310: An integration over the fermion fields then reduces the 

311: partition function to

312: \begin{eqnarray}

313: Z(\mu,T) &=& \int d\sigma d\Delta \exp\left[-4 N \Omega(\sigma,\Delta)\right],

314: \label{partfunceff}

315: \end{eqnarray}

316: where $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)$ is the negative of the pressure,

317: $P(\sigma,\Delta)$, per degree of freedom and per unit spin and flavor, 

318: \begin{eqnarray}

319: \Omega(\sigma,\Delta) & = & - P(\sigma,\Delta) \nonumber \\

320: & = & A \Delta^2 + B \sigma^2 -{1\over 2} \bigg\{ 

321: (N_c-2) \log\Big[ \Big( (\sigma + m - \mu)^2 +  T^2 \Big) 

322: \Big( (\sigma + m + \mu)^2+  T^2 \Big) \Big]  \nonumber \\

323: && + 

324: 2 \log\Big[ \Big( (\sigma + m - \mu)^2 +  T^2 + |\Delta+\eta| ^2 \Big) 

325: \Big( (\sigma + m  + \mu)^2 +  T^2 + |\Delta+\eta|^2 \Big) \Big] 

326: \bigg\},

327: \label{Omega}

328: \end{eqnarray}

329: where we have dropped the prefactors $\pi$ in the temperature dependence for

330: simplicity.  Here, the coupling constants $A$ and $B$ are weighted averages

331: of the Fierz coefficients $f^{Ca}_\Delta$ and $f^{Ca}_\chi$ obtained

332: respectively by projecting the interaction $\Gamma_C \otimes \Lambda_a$ onto

333: chiral and diquark channels,

334: \begin{eqnarray}

335: A = 2 \left(\sum_{Ca} \Sigma_{Ca}^{-2} f_\Delta^{Ca}\right)^{-1}, \,\,

336: B = 2 \left(\sum_{Ca} \Sigma_{Ca}^{-2} f_\chi^{Ca}\right)^{-1}.

337: \label{AB}

338: \end{eqnarray}

339: To make contact to microscopic theories, we note that a small coupling

340: limit in either channel corresponds to a small Fierz constant and hence to

341: large parameters $A$ or $B$. This limit favors small fields $\Delta$ or

342: $\sigma$. Because we can always rescale the condensation fields by either

343: $\sqrt{A}$ or $\sqrt{B}$, the only independent parameter in Eq.~(\ref{Omega})

344: is the ratio of $B/A$, which by virtue of Eq.~(\ref{AB}) is a measure of the

345: balance between the condensation forces. Again, Hermitian matrices ${\cal H}$

346: satisfy $B/A \le N_c/2$. 

347: 

348: The mass $m$ and the parameter $\eta$ explicitly break chiral and color

349: symmetries. They act as external fields which select a particular direction

350: for the condensation pattern, and should be taken to zero at the end of the

351: calculations. (They can also be kept constant to study the effect of a small

352: external field, a point which we take in Sec.~\ref{s:discuss}.) They are

353: useful for obtaining the order parameters from derivatives of the partition

354: function.  In the thermodynamic limit $N \to \infty$, $Z(\mu,T)$ in

355: Eq.~(\ref{partfunceff}) obeys

356: \begin{eqnarray}

357: \lim_{N \to \infty} \log Z(\mu,T) = - \lim_{N \to \infty} 4 N \,\,

358: {\min}_{\sigma,\Delta} \left\{\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)\right\},

359: \end{eqnarray}

360: where the right side represents the global minimum of $\Omega$ in

361: Eq.~(\ref{Omega}) for fixed $\mu$ and $T$.  The order parameters for chiral and

362: diquark condensations are given as

363: \begin{eqnarray}

364: \langle \psi^\dagger \psi \rangle  =  \lim_{m \to 0} \lim_{N \to \infty} 

365: \left. \frac{1}{4 N_f N} \frac{\partial \log  Z}{\partial m} 

366: \right|_{\eta,\eta^*=0}, \quad

367: \langle \psi^T \psi \rangle  =  - \lim_{\eta,\eta^* \to 0}  \lim_{N\to \infty}

368: \left. \frac{1}{4 N} \frac{\partial \log Z}{\partial \eta^*}\right|_{m=0},

369: \label{orderparameters}

370: \end{eqnarray}

371: where the number of flavor is $N_f = 2$. Note that the thermodynamic limit $N

372: \to \infty$ must be taken first before the small field limit $m,\eta \to 0$,

373: see~\cite{JacVer96}.  Given the $m$- and $\eta$-dependences of the log terms

374: in Eq.~(\ref{Omega}), we have

375: \begin{eqnarray}

376: \langle \psi^\dagger \psi \rangle = B\, \sigma(\mu, T), \quad 

377: \langle \psi^T \psi \rangle  =  A\, \Delta(\mu,T),

378: \end{eqnarray}

379: where $\sigma(\mu,T)$ and $\Delta(\mu,T)$ are the condensation fields

380: which minimize $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)$ for fixed $\mu$ and $T$.

381: 

382: Equation~(\ref{Omega}) is the main expression from which we will deduce the

383: phase structure as a function of the ratio $B/A$.  Its form is very simple to

384: understand. The quadratic terms correspond to the energy cost for creating

385: static field configurations with finite $\sigma$ and $\Delta$. The log terms

386: represent the energy of interaction between the condensation fields and the

387: quark degrees of freedom.  They can be written in a compact form as ${\rm

388:   Tr}[\log S(\sigma,\Delta)] = \log {\rm det}~S(\sigma, \Delta)$, where ${\rm

389:   Tr}$ is a trace in flavor, spin, and color, and $S$ is the single quark

390: propagator in a background of $\sigma$ and $\Delta$ fields. Substituting the

391: Mastubara frequency $T \to i p_4$, it becomes clear that the poles of $S$ in

392: $p_4$ correspond to the excitation energies of the system.  From

393: Eq.~(\ref{Omega}), we see that two colors develop gapped excitations with

394: \begin{eqnarray}

395: p_4 & = & \pm \sqrt{(\sigma \mp \mu)^2+\Delta^2},

396: \label{gapped}

397: \end{eqnarray}

398: where the plus and minus signs respectively correspond to particle and

399: antiparticle modes. The $N_c-2$ remaining colors have ungapped excitation

400: with

401: \begin{eqnarray}

402: p_4 & = & \pm |\sigma \mp \mu|.

403: \label{ungapped}

404: \end{eqnarray}

405: 

406: It is important to recognize that the potential $\Omega$ in Eq.~(\ref{Omega})

407: contains the contribution to the thermodynamics from only the low energy

408: modes of Eqs.~(\ref{gapped}) and (\ref{ungapped}).  The right side of

409: Eq.~(\ref{Omega}) thus corresponds to the non-analytic piece in the

410: thermodynamic potential which describes the critical physics related to

411: chiral and color symmetry breaking. In a microscopic model, the right side of

412: Eq.~(8) would also contain a smooth analytic component $\Omega_{\rm

413:   reg}(\mu,T)$ which arises from all other, non-critical degrees of freedom

414: in the system. Our model does not contain this contribution and thus cannot

415: be taken as a quantitative description of bulk thermodynamics properties; the

416: model is constructed to describe the critical properties and should be used

417: as such.

418: 

419: We show in the next section that the forms of the potential

420: $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)$ in Eq.~(\ref{Omega}) and of the associated excitation

421: energies in Eqs.~(\ref{gapped}) and (\ref{ungapped}) are sufficient to

422: produce a rich variety of phase diagrams which illustrate in a clear way the

423: interplay between chiral and color symmetries. In particular, we will find

424: that single-gluon exchange reproduces the topology obtained in many

425: microscopic models of finite density QCD, see for

426: instance~\cite{RapSch98,CarDia99,BerRaj99,SchKle99}.

427: 

428: \section{Exploring the phase diagrams}

429: \label{s:pd}

430: 

431: We noted earlier that the potential $\Omega$ in Eq.~(\ref{Omega}) is very

432: similar to a Landau-Ginzburg functional.  Although $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)$ is

433: not an algebraic function, it is equivalent to a polynomial of order

434: $\sigma^6$ and $\Delta^4$: The gap equations reduce to coupled polynomial

435: equations of fifth order in $\sigma$ and third order in $\Delta$.

436: Generically, four types of solutions exist:

437: \begin{itemize}

438: \item (i) the $0$-phase, the trivial phase in which both

439: $\sigma$ and $\Delta$ vanish, 

440: \item (ii) the $\chi$-phase, in which chiral symmetry

441: is spontaneously broken but $\Delta=0$,

442: \item  (iii) the $\Delta$-phase, in which

443: color symmetry is spontaneously broken but $\sigma=0$, 

444: \item (iv) the $\chi\Delta$

445: phase, a mixed broken symmetry phase in which both fields are

446: non-vanishing, $\sigma \neq 0$ and $\Delta \neq 0$.  

447: \end{itemize}

448: The $\chi\Delta$-phase is thermodynamically distinct from the $\chi$- and

449: $\Delta$-phases and is not a ``mixture'' of these two phases.

450: 

451: At a given $\mu$, $T$, and $B/A$, each of the solutions (i) - (iv) can either

452: be a minimum or a saddle-point of $\Omega$. The complex flow of these

453: solutions with the variation of $B/A$ leads to large variety of phase

454: diagrams. The phase structures can however be grouped according to their

455: topologies as shown in Figs.~\ref{f:panel1}-~\ref{f:panel6}.~\footnote{We

456:   have rescaled in each figure the units of $T$ and $\mu$  for clarity.}

457: Figure~\ref{f:panel1} shows the case of smallest values $B/A$, which favor

458: chiral over diquark condensation. $B/A$ then increases continuously from

459: Fig.~\ref{f:panel2} to~\ref{f:panel6}. We now discuss Figs.~1-6 in the

460: six following subsections. We indicate in parentheses the corresponding

461: ranges of $B/A$ and discuss their limits in the text.

462: 

463: {\bf Pure chiral condensation:} ($0 \le B/A \le 0.139 N_c$ or $0 \le B/A \le

464: 0.418$ for $N_c=3$; see Fig.~1). Generically, the global minimum of $\Omega$

465: in Eq.~(\ref{Omega}) is realized by field configurations which maximize the

466: log terms while keeping reasonably low values of the quadratic terms $A

467: \Delta^2 + B \sigma^2$. We consider first the limit $A \gg B$.  The minimum

468: of $\Omega$ must then correspond to $\Delta = 0$ in order to avoid the large

469: energy penalty $\sim A \Delta^2$. No diquark condensation occurs in this

470: case, and color enters only as a prefactor $N_c$ in the number of degrees of

471: freedom. This becomes clear if we absorb $N_c$ into $B$ and set $B$ to $1$;

472: we then recover the potential $\Omega$ studied in the chiral random matrix

473: models~\cite{HalJac98} which neglect color altogether.

474: 

475: We briefly recall the phase structure in this case.  The gap equation for the

476: chiral field, $\partial \Omega(\sigma,0)/\partial \sigma = 0$, has a trivial

477: root $\sigma =0$ and four other roots which satisfy the following quadratic

478: equation for $\sigma^2$

479: \begin{eqnarray}

480:  N_c (\mu^2-T^2)+B (\mu^2+T^2)^2 +

481:  (2 B (T^2-\mu^2)-N_c) \sigma^2 & + & B \sigma^4 =  0.

482: \label{sigma4}

483: \end{eqnarray}

484: In the high temperature limit $T \gg \mu$, both roots in $\sigma^2$ are

485: negative. The only real solution of the gap equation is $\sigma=0$, and the

486: system is in the symmetric phase.  Decreasing $T$ for fixed $\mu$, one

487: encounters a line of second-order phase transitions

488: \begin{eqnarray}

489: L_{\chi,2} \equiv N_c (\mu^2-T^2)+B(\mu^2+T^2)^2 & = & 0,

490: \label{sigma_second}

491: \end{eqnarray}

492: where one of the roots $\sigma^2$ in Eq.~(\ref{sigma4}) vanishes.  Below

493: $L_{\chi,2}$, the trivial root becomes a local maximum of $\Omega(\sigma,0)$,

494: and we have a pair of local minima at the real roots $\sigma = \pm \sigma_0$,

495: where

496: \begin{eqnarray}

497: \sigma_0 = \left(\frac{N_c}{2 B}- T^2+\mu^2 + 

498: \frac{\sqrt{N_c^2-16 B^2 \mu^2 T^2}}{2 B}\right)^{1/2}.

499: \label{sigma0}

500: \end{eqnarray}

501: These roots correspond to a chiral broken phase.  They become

502: degenerate with $\sigma = 0$ on the second-order line $L_{\chi,2}$, where the

503: potential $\Omega$ scales as $\Omega(\sigma,0) - \Omega(0,0) \approx

504: \sigma^4$.  Thus, the critical exponents near $L_{\chi,2}$ are those of a

505: mean-field $\phi^4$ theory.

506: 

507: The second-order line ends at a tricritical point $(\mu_3,T_3)$ at which all

508: five roots of the gap equation vanish and where

509: $\Omega(\sigma,0)-\Omega(0,0)\approx \sigma^6$, giving now critical exponents

510: of a mean-field $\phi^6$ theory. From Eq.~(\ref{sigma4}), this happens when

511: $2 B (T_3^2-\mu_3^2)-N_c=0$, which with the use of Eq.~(\ref{sigma_second})

512: gives

513: \begin{eqnarray}

514: \mu_3  =  \sqrt{\frac{N_c}{4 B}} \sqrt{\sqrt{2}-1}, \quad \quad

515: T_3  =  \sqrt{\frac{N_c}{4 B}} \sqrt{\sqrt{2}+1}.

516: \label{tricritical}

517: \end{eqnarray}

518: For $\mu > \mu_3$, the transition between the chiral and trivial phases

519: is first-order and takes place along the line of equal pressure 

520: \begin{eqnarray}

521: L_{\chi,1} \equiv && \frac{N_c}{2} \left(1+\sqrt{1- 16 \mu^2 T^2

522:     \frac{B^2}{N_c^2} } -\log \left[\frac{N_c^2}{2 B^2} \left( 1+ \sqrt{1-16

523:         \mu^2 T^2 \frac{B^2}{N_c^2}} \right) \right] \right)

524: \nonumber \\

525: && + N_c \log\left[\mu^2+T^2\right] + B (\mu^2-T^2) = 0.

526: \label{Lchi1}

527: \end{eqnarray} 

528: This line intercepts the $T=0$ axis at 

529: $\mu=\mu_1$ which obeys

530: \begin{eqnarray}

531: 1+{B \mu_1^2\over N_c}+\log({B \mu_1^2 \over N_c})=0.

532: \label{mu1}

533: \end{eqnarray}

534: This gives $\mu_1 = 0.528 \sqrt{N_c/B}$, or $\mu_1 = 0.914/\sqrt{B}$ for

535: $N_c=3$.

536: 

537: 

538: $L_{\rm \chi,1}$ in Eq.~(\ref{Lchi1}) is a triple line.  To see this and

539: clarify the character of $(\mu_3,T_3)$, it is useful to consider the effect

540: of a non-zero quark current mass $m$~\cite{HalJac98}.  A mass $m \neq 0$

541: selects a particular direction for chiral condensation. If we now consider

542: the three-dimensional parameter space $(\mu,T,m)$, the region delimited by

543: $L_{\chi,2}$ and $L_{\chi,1}$ in the plane $m=0$ thus appears to be a surface

544: of coexistence of the two ordered phases with the chiral fields $\pm

545: \sigma_0$ of Eq.~(\ref{sigma0}).  Along $L_{\chi,1}$, this surface meets two

546: other `wing' surfaces which extend symmetrically into the regions $m >0$ and

547: $m <0$.  Each of the wings is a coexistence surface between one of the

548: ordered phases whose chiral field continues to $\sigma = \pm \sigma_0$ as

549: $m\to 0$ and the high temperature phase.  Hence, $L_{\chi,1}$ marks the

550: coexistence of three phases and is a triple line.  The three phases become

551: identical at $(\mu_3,T_3)$, which is thus a tricritical point. The second-

552: and first-order lines $L_{\chi,1}$ and $L_{\chi,2}$ join tangentially at

553: $(\mu_3,T_3)$, see~\cite{DomGre84}.

554: 

555: The onset of diquark condensation modifies the topology that we have just

556: described. This takes place for coupling ratios $B/A \ge 0.139 N_c$ to which

557: we now turn.

558: 

559: {\bf The QCD case:} ($0.139 N_c \le B/A \le \alpha_1(N_c)$ or $0.418 \le B/A

560: \le 1.05$ for $N_c=3$; see Fig.~2). To understand the conditions for the

561: onset of diquark condensation, consider a pure diquark phase by setting

562: $\sigma=0$ in Eq.~(\ref{Omega}). The gap equation $\partial \Omega/\partial

563: \Delta=0$ then has three solutions: $\Delta = 0$, and $\Delta=\pm\Delta_0$

564: where $\Delta_0 = \sqrt{2/A -\mu^2-T^2}$. In the high $T$ and $\mu$ phase,

565: only the trivial root is real and the system is in the symmetric phase.

566: Inside the semicircle

567: \begin{eqnarray}

568: L_{\rm \Delta,2} \equiv 2/A-\mu^2-T^2=0,

569: \end{eqnarray} 

570: the trivial root becomes a maximum of $\Omega(0,\Delta)$, and we have a pair

571: of two real minima $\Delta = \pm \Delta_0$ for which color symmetry is

572: spontaneously broken.  The roots $\pm \Delta_0$ go continuously to zero as

573: one approaches $L_{\Delta,2}$, which is thus a second-order line provided no

574: other phase develops. The fate of other ordering forms depends on the

575: pressure in the diquark phase,

576: \begin{eqnarray}

577: P_\Delta=-\Omega_\Delta & = & A (\mu^2+T^2) - 2  + (N_c-2) \log\left( \mu^2 + 

578: T^2 \right)+ 2 \log\left(\frac{2}{A}\right).

579: \end{eqnarray}

580: The maximum pressure $P_\Delta$ is reached on $L_{\Delta,2}$, where it

581: also equals the pressure of the trivial phase.  The condition for the

582: onset of diquark condensation is then clear: The semicircle must lie

583: in part outside the region occupied by the chiral phase. Then, the

584: maximum pressure in the diquark phase is higher than that of the

585: chiral phase, and the diquark phase is stable near the semicircle.

586: 

587: To find the minimum ratio $B/A$ for which this condition holds, we compare

588: the dimensions of the chiral phase to the radius of the semicircle, $\mu_{\rm

589:   semi}\equiv \sqrt{2/A}$.  When $B/A \ll 1$, the line $L_{\Delta,2}$ lies

590: well inside the boundaries of the chiral phase, whose linear dimensions are

591: $T=\sqrt{N_c/B}$ (along $\mu=0$) and $\mu_1=0.528 \sqrt{N_c/B}$ (along

592: $T=0$). The onset of diquark condensation requires therefore $B/A$ to be

593: large enough that the semicircle crosses the first-order line between chiral

594: and trivial phases. This takes place along $T=0$ when $\mu_{\rm

595:   semi}=\mu_{1}$, or

596: \begin{eqnarray}

597: \sqrt{2/A} = 0.528 \sqrt{N_c/B},

598: \end{eqnarray}

599: which gives $B/A = 0.139 N_c$, or $B/A = 0.418$ for $N_c =3$.

600: 

601: For larger values of $B/A$, the diquark phase exists in a region delimited by

602: $L_{\Delta,2}$, on which it coexists with the symmetric phase, and by a

603: first-order line of equal pressure with the chiral phase.  This phase diagram

604: is realized for ratios including that corresponding to single-gluon exchange,

605: $B/A = N_c/ (2 (N_c-1))$ (or $3/4$ for $N_c=3$), which is the ratio taken in

606: Fig.~\ref{f:panel2}. We have verified that the two segments of first-order

607: lines, between the chiral and the diquark phases on the one hand and the

608: chiral and trivial phases on the other hand, join tangentially.

609: Figure~\ref{f:fields} shows the chiral and diquark fields as a function of

610: $\mu$ and $T$. It is worth noting that the chiral field vanishes with a

611: square root law near the second-order line $L_{\rm \chi,2}$ and is

612: discontinuous along the first-order line $L_{\chi,1}$.  The diquark field

613: vanishes with a square root law all along the semicircle line.

614: 

615: The topology in Fig.~\ref{f:panel2} can also be summarized by a simple

616: counting argument.  Consider the difference between the pressures in the

617: diquark and the chiral phases along the $T=0$ axis,

618: \begin{eqnarray}

619: \Delta \Omega = \Omega_\chi-\Omega_\Delta 

620: = N_c-2 +(A+B)\mu^2- 2\log \frac{A \mu^2}{2} + N_c \log\frac{B \mu^2}{N_c}.

621: \label{DeltaOmega}

622: \end{eqnarray}

623: This difference varies from $\Delta \Omega = N_c (1 + (2B)/(N_c A)

624: +\log[(2B)/(N_c A)])$ as $\mu \to \sqrt{2/A}$, to $\Delta \Omega = (N_c-2)

625: \log \mu^2$ as $\mu \to 0$. We have just argued that $\Delta\Omega$ can be

626: negative in the former limit if $B/A> 0.139 N_c$. In the latter limit,

627: however, $\Delta\Omega$ is always negative for $N_c > 2$ and the system is

628: necessarily in the chiral phase. That the diquark phase must be metastable

629: for small $\mu$ is clearly a consequence of the fact that chiral condensation

630: uses all $N_c$ colors while diquark condensation uses only colors $1$ and

631: $2$. This counting argument was mentioned in early models of color

632: superconductivity~\cite{AlfRaj98} and is here completely manifest.  For $N_c

633: > 2$, the diquark phase must appear at densities higher than those

634: appropriate for the chiral phase.

635: 

636: {\bf Onset of the mixed broken symmetry phase:} ($\alpha_1(N_c) \le B/A \le

637: N_c/\sqrt{8}$ or $1.05 \le B/A \le 1.06$ for $N_c=3$; see Fig.~3). The chiral

638: solution $\sigma_0$, Eq.~(\ref{sigma0}), ceases to be a local minimum of

639: $\Omega(\sigma,0)$ for sufficiently large $\mu$.  It turns into a saddle

640: point along a line where the second derivative $\partial^2

641: \Omega/\partial \Delta^2$ vanishes,

642: \begin{eqnarray}

643: L_{\rm mix} \equiv 

644: \left(N_c A - 2 B\right) \left( N_c+\sqrt{N_c^2-16 B^2 \mu^2 T^2}\right)

645: - 8 B^2 \mu^2 = 0.

646: \label{mixline}

647: \end{eqnarray}

648: A new minimum of $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)$ with both $\sigma \neq 0$ and

649: $\Delta \neq 0$ develops in the region to the right of $L_{\rm mix}$.

650: This new minimum corresponds to a new phase, the $\chi\Delta$-phase, which

651: competes with the diquark phase. When the $\chi\Delta$-phase first appears

652: along $L_{\rm mix}$, it has the same pressure as the chiral phase.

653: Therefore, the condition for this new phase to realize the largest pressure

654: is that the instability line $L_{\rm mix}$ lies in the region spanned by the

655: chiral phase. Then, along $L_{\rm mix}$, the new phase necessarily has a

656: pressure that exceeds that in the diquark phase and is favored.

657: 

658: To see what ratios $B/A$ are needed for the mixed broken symmetry phase,

659: consider the point where $L_{\rm mix}$ meets the $T=0$ axis,

660: \begin{eqnarray}

661: \mu_{\rm mix}&=& \sqrt{\frac{N_c}{2 B} \left({N_c A\over 2 B}-1\right)}.

662: \label{mumix}

663: \end{eqnarray}

664: When $B/A \ll 1$, $\mu_{\rm mix} \sim \sqrt{N_c/B}/ \sqrt{ 4B/A} \gg

665: \sqrt{N_c/B}$ and $L_{\rm mix}$ lies well outside the chiral phase.  $L_{\rm

666:   mix}$ then moves towards the $\chi$-phase as $B/A$ increases. It first

667: crosses the first-order line between chiral and diquark phases when $\mu_{\rm

668:   mix}=\mu_1$, where $\mu_1$ is the point of equal pressure which obeys

669: $\Delta\Omega=0$ in Eq.~(\ref{DeltaOmega}). This condition gives a ratio $B/A

670: = \alpha_1(N_c)$, where $\alpha_1$ is a non-trivial function of $N_c$ which

671: we study in the appendix.  Here, we note only that $\alpha_1(3)=1.05$ for

672: three colors.  When $B/A > \alpha_1(N_c)$, we find that the mixed broken

673: symmetry phase develops in the wedge bordered by the second-order line

674: $L_{\rm mix}$ of Eq.~(\ref{mixline}), and a first-order line on which it

675: coexists with the diquark phase. The phase diagram is shown in

676: Fig.~\ref{f:panel3}, while an expanded view of the wedge of mixed broken

677: symmetry and of the first-order line near $(\mu_3,T_3)$ are

678: respectively shown in Figs.~\ref{f:panel3b} and~\ref{f:panel3c}.

679: 

680: {\bf A new critical point:} ($N_c/\sqrt{8} \le B/A \le \alpha_2(N_c)$ or

681: $1.06 \le B/A \le 1.163$ for $N_c = 3$; see Fig.~4).  As $B/A$ increases above

682: $\alpha_1(N_c)$, the semicircle $2/A = \mu^2+T^2$ grows relative to the

683: chiral phase, and eventually reaches the tricritical point $(\mu_3,T_3)$ of

684: Eq.~(\ref{tricritical}) when $B/A = N_c / \sqrt{8}$.  At this stage, the

685: segment of first-order line between chiral and trivial phases disappears. For

686: $B/A > N_c/\sqrt{8}$, the semicircle meets the second-order line between

687: chiral and trivial phases, $L_{\chi,2}$ in Eq.~(\ref{sigma_second}), at a new

688: critical point

689: \begin{eqnarray}

690: \mu_4 = \sqrt{{1\over A}\left(1 - {2 B \over N_c A}\right)}, \quad

691: T_4 = \sqrt{{1\over A}\left(1 + {2 B \over N_c A}\right)},

692: \label{tetracritical}

693: \end{eqnarray}

694: which now separates three phases as shown in Fig. \ref{f:panel4}.

695: 

696: {\bf Coexistence of four phases:} ($\alpha_2(N_c) \le B/A \le N_c/2$ or

697: $1.163 \le B/A \le 1.5$ for $N_c=3$; see Fig.~5). With still higher coupling

698: ratios $B/A$, the wedge of mixed broken symmetry in Fig.~\ref{f:panel4} grows

699: in size relative to the other phases.  Its tip reaches the new critical point

700: $(\mu_4,T_4)$ when $B/A$ satisfies the condition

701: \begin{eqnarray}

702: {B \over A}  = \alpha_2(N_c) \equiv \frac{4 N_c - N_c^{3/2} 

703: \sqrt{2 N_c-4}}{4 (4 - N_c)},

704: \label{alpha2}

705: \end{eqnarray}

706: the derivation of which we detail in the appendix. We just note here that

707: $\alpha_2( 3 ) = 1.163$.  This coupling ratio also marks the appearance of

708: two new critical points, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{f:panel5}. First, when

709: $B/A > \alpha_2(N_c)$, the point $(\mu_4,T_4)$ characterizes the coexistence

710: of all four phases, and it has thus become a {tetracritical} point. The

711: pressure of the system at $(\mu_4,T_4)$ has the form

712: $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)-\Omega(0,0) \approx a \sigma^4 + b \Delta^4+ c

713: \sigma^2 \Delta^2$, where $a$, $b$, and $c$ are constants detailed in the

714: appendix.  We note in particular that none of the four second-order lines in

715: Fig.~5 join tangentially at the tetracritical point.

716: 

717: The second point appearing above $B/A=\alpha_2(N_c)$ is a tricritical

718: point $(\mu_{\rm 3m},T_{\rm 3m})$ which lies on the boundary between the

719: $\chi\Delta$- and the $\Delta$-phases. Its origin can be understood from the

720: similarity between the characters of the mixed broken symmetry phase and the

721: chiral phase. The diquark field in the $\chi\Delta$-phase is 

722: \begin{eqnarray}

723: \Delta(\sigma) & =& \left({1+\sqrt{1+4 A^2 \mu^2 \sigma^2}\over A}

724: -\mu^2-T^2-\sigma^2 \right)^{1/2}.

725: \end{eqnarray}

726: Substituting $\Delta$ in $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)$ for this expression, we find

727: that the gap equation for the chiral field, $\partial

728: \Omega(\sigma,\Delta(\sigma))/\partial \sigma = 0$, has five roots.  Despite

729: the fact that $\Delta(\sigma) \neq 0$, the dynamics of these roots as a

730: function of $\mu$ and $T$ is identical to that of the roots in the pure

731: chiral condensation case discussed at the beginning of this section.  In

732: particular, the transition to the $\Delta$-phase starts out second-order near

733: $(\mu_4,T_4)$ and takes place along a line where three of the five roots

734: vanish. This second-order line is thus determined by the condition

735: \begin{eqnarray}

736: \left.\frac{d^2 \Omega}{d \sigma^2}(\sigma,\Delta(\sigma))\right|_{\sigma \to

737:   0}& = & 0,

738: \label{partial2Om}

739: \end{eqnarray}

740: which is the analog of Eq.~(\ref{sigma_second}) and gives 

741: \begin{eqnarray}

742: L_{\chi\Delta \to \Delta,2} \equiv 

743: (N_c-2) (\mu^2-T^2) + \left(B- A(1-A \mu^2)\right)\left(\mu^2+T^2\right)^2=0.

744: \label{mixtocol}

745: \end{eqnarray}

746: In analogy with the pure chiral case, the transition becomes first order at

747: high $\mu$; second- and first-order segments join tangentially at a 

748:   tricritical point $(\mu_{3\rm m},T_{3\rm m})$.

749: 

750: We determine the location of this point as follows.  We observe that, as in

751:  the pure chiral broken case, the potential along the second-order line

752: $L_{\chi\Delta \to \Delta,2}$ has the form $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta(\sigma)) -

753: \Omega(0,0) \approx \sigma^4$. (See Eq.~(\ref{partial2Om}).) 

754: This scaling form  becomes

755: $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta(\sigma)) -\Omega(0,0) \approx \sigma^6$ at $(\mu_{3\rm

756:   m},T_{3\rm m})$ where all five roots vanish.

757: Thus, the tricritical point is located on the line $L_{\chi\Delta \to

758:   \Delta,2}$ at the point where

759: \begin{eqnarray}

760: \frac{d^4\Omega}{d\sigma^4}\left(\sigma,\Delta(\sigma)\right) & = & 0,

761: \label{trimix}

762: \end{eqnarray}

763: which is the analog of the condition $2 B(T^2-\mu^2)-N_c=0$ for the pure

764: chiral case.  We have solved Eq.~(\ref{trimix}) numerically to determine

765: $(\mu_{3\rm m},T_{3 \rm m})$ in Figs.~\ref{f:panel5} and~\ref{f:panel6}.

766: 

767: {\bf Disappearance of the chiral phase.} ($\alpha_2(N_c) \le B/A$; see

768: Figs.~6 and~10).  The wedge of mixed broken symmetry gains space in the

769: $(\mu,T)$ plane at the expense of the chiral phase as $B/A$ increases above

770: $\alpha_2(N_c)$. The chiral phase eventually shrinks to a vertical line along

771: the $\mu=0$ axis when $B/A=N_c/2$, as shown in Fig.~\ref{f:panel5b}. That the

772: chiral phase is still present for $\mu=0$ can be understood as follows. When

773: $B/A =N_c/2$ and $\mu = 0$, both condensation fields appear in

774: Eq.~(\ref{Omega}) in the combination $\sigma^2+\Delta^2$. A pure diquark

775: solution $(\sigma,\Delta)=(0,\Delta_0)$ can thus always be rotated into a

776: pure chiral solution $(\sigma,\Delta)=(\Delta_0,0)$~\cite{VanJac99}, and thus

777: does not represent an independent phase. This symmetry is however no longer

778: present as soon as $\mu \neq 0$, in which case the diquark phase becomes

779: thermodynamically independent from the chiral phase.

780: 

781: Recall that the ratio $B/A = N_c/2$ is the maximum ratio that our model can

782: realize~\cite{VanJac99}. It is instructive however to explore higher coupling

783: ratios, although they do not necessarily describe physical situations, by

784: setting $B/A > N_c/2$ by hand in Eq.~(\ref{Omega}). We find that higher $B/A$

785: force the diquark phase to grow in size at the expense of the mixed broken 

786: symmetry phase. Figure~\ref{f:panel6} shows one example with $B/A =1.8$ and

787: $N_c = 3$. The similarities between the critical properties of the mixed

788: broken symmetry phase and those of the pure chiral broken phase are now

789: clear: Compare for instance the critical lines between Figs.~\ref{f:panel1}

790: and~\ref{f:panel6}.

791: 

792: \section{Discussion}

793: \label{s:discuss}

794: 

795: { \bf Baryon density discontinuity.} We have argued that the potential

796: $\Omega$ in Eq.~(8) represents the non-analytic contribution to the

797: thermodynamics which is directly associated with the breaking of chiral and

798: color symmetry. The potential $\Omega$ should therefore not be used too

799: literally in computations of the bulk properties of the phases we have

800: encountered. It may however give reasonable estimates of discontinuities near

801: a phase transition. For instance in the pure chiral case, the random matrix

802: models of Ref.~\cite{HalJac98} estimate that the baryon density $n_B = -(1/3)

803: \partial \Omega(\mu,T)/\partial \mu$ changes discontinuously at the first

804: order point along $T=0$ by an amount $\Delta n_B \sim 2.5\, n_0$. Here, $n_0

805: = 0.17\, {\rm fm}^{-3}$ is the density of normal nuclear matter. The result

806: for $\Delta n_B$ relies on an evaluation of the number of degrees of freedom

807: $N$ from instanton models and seems to be a reasonable estimate of the

808: baryon density discontinuity~\cite{HalJac98}.

809: 

810: $\Delta n_B$ is modified by the presence of diquark condensation.  We

811: consider single-gluon exchange with $N_c=3$, which realizes $B/A=3/4$, and

812: work in the limit $T=0$. Taking the derivative of Eq.~(\ref{DeltaOmega}) with

813: respect to $\mu$, we find the discontinuity in baryon density at the point

814: $\mu_1$ of equal pressure between chiral and color phases to be

815: \begin{eqnarray}

816: N_\Delta-N_\chi & = & \frac{2}{\mu_1} \left(1+\frac{7}{3} B \mu_1^2\right).

817: \label{deltaNcol}

818: \end{eqnarray}

819: Here, $\mu_1$ obeys $\Omega_\chi=\Omega_\Delta$ in Eq.~(\ref{DeltaOmega}); we

820: have $\mu_1 = 0.87 /\sqrt{B}$. Hence, $N_\Delta - N_\chi \sim 6.4

821: \,\sqrt{B}$ in the appropriate unit of inverse chemical potential.  Were no

822: diquark condensation to occur, we would have found a discontinuity

823: \begin{eqnarray}

824: N_0-N_\chi & = & \frac{6}{\mu_1} \left( 1+ \frac{B \mu_1^2}{3} \right),

825: \end{eqnarray}

826: where $\mu_1$ is now the point of equal pressure between chiral and trivial

827: phases. We want to keep the same $B$ as in Eq.~(\ref{deltaNcol}) so as to

828: compare two situations which realize the same vacuum chiral field $\sigma_0 =

829: \sqrt{3/B}$. The condition of equal pressure in Eq.~(\ref{mu1}) gives then

830: $\mu_1=0.914/\sqrt{B}$ and we have $N_0-N_\chi \sim 8.4 \,\sqrt{B}$. Thus, we

831: find that diquark condensation reduces the discontinuity in baryon density by

832: roughly twenty five percent.

833: 

834: {\bf Away from the chiral limit.} We now turn to study the effects of a small

835: quark current mass $m$ in Eq.~(\ref{Omega}). For $m \neq 0$, chiral symmetry

836: is explicitely broken, and the chiral condensate $\langle \psi^\dagger

837: \psi\rangle$ ceases to be a good order parameter. This affects the phase

838: diagrams in Figs.  1-6 in a number of ways.  We consider the effect of a

839: small mass $m$ chosen so that $m \sim 10$ MeV in units for which the vacuum

840: chiral field is $\sigma \approx \sqrt{3/B} \sim 400$ MeV and illustrate a

841: few cases in Figs.  11-14.

842: 

843: Figure 11 shows the limit of small ratios $B/A$ which favor chiral over

844: diquark condensation. Since $\langle \psi^\dagger \psi \rangle $ is no longer

845: a good order parameter, any two given points in the phase diagram can be

846: connected by a trajectory along which no thermodynamic discontinuity occurs.

847: It results that the second-order line $L_{\chi,2}$ in

848: Eq.~(\ref{sigma_second}) is no longer present when $m \neq 0$. There remains,

849: however, a first-order line, which ends at a regular critical point

850: $(\mu_c,T_c)$. This point can be  located as follows.  Along the first-order

851: line, the potential $\Omega(\sigma,0)$ has two minima of equal depth

852: separated by a single maximum.  All three extrema become degenerate at the

853: critical point $(\mu_c,T_c)$, past which $\Omega(\sigma,0)$ possesses only

854: one minimum.  The location of $(\mu_c,T_c)$ can thus be determined from the

855: condition that $\Omega(\sigma,0)$ scales as

856: \begin{eqnarray}

857: \Omega(\sigma,0) - \Omega(0,0) \sim (\sigma - \sigma_0)^4,

858: \end{eqnarray}

859: at $(\mu_c,T_c)$ and for small deviations $|\sigma-\sigma_0|$. The location

860: of $(\mu_c, T_c)$, as well as $\sigma_0$, are then determined by requiring

861: the first three derivatives of $\Omega(\sigma,0)$ to vanish at the critical

862: point and for $\sigma = \sigma_0$.  A small mass tends to increase the

863: pressure in the low density `phase' with respect to that in the high density

864: `phase'. Its results that a mass $m$ displaces the first-order line

865: $L_{\chi,1}$ of Eq.~(\ref{Lchi1}) to higher $\mu$ by an amount linear in $m$.

866: The pressure increase also delays the onset of diquark condensation; the

867: ratio $B/A$ for which the diquark appears first increases linearly with $m$.

868: 

869: Figure 12 shows the case of QCD: there is now a second-order line

870: $L_{\Delta,2}$ which separates the high temperature phase from a mixed broken

871: symmetry phase; the dominant effect of $m$ on the diquark phase in Fig.~2 is

872: to produce a small chiral field $\sigma \sim m$. The effect on the

873: thermodynamics in both the chiral and the trivial phases is, however,

874: second order in $m$, and so is the displacement of the second-order line

875: $L_{\Delta,2}$ from Fig.~2 to Fig.~12.

876: 

877: The evolution of the phase diagram for higher $B/A$ parallels the evolution

878: we have outlined for $m=0$ in Figs. 3-6. The phase with a finite diquark

879: field grows until it eventually reaches the critical point $(\mu_c,T_c)$.

880: Higher ratios lead to a phase structure in which the first- and second-order

881: lines intersect as shown in Fig. 13. A wedge of another mixed broken symmetry

882: phase, initially with a large chiral field and a small diquark field, appears

883: at still higher $B/A$ on the left of the first-order line. This wedge grows

884: in size until it encounters the boundary of the other mixed broken symmetry

885: phase.  The second-order lines then merge into a single continuous line as

886: shown in Fig.~14.  This line is the locus of point for which

887: \begin{eqnarray}

888: \left. \frac{\partial^2 \Omega(\sigma,\Delta)}{\partial

889:     \Delta^2}\right|_{\Delta = 0} = 0,

890: \end{eqnarray}

891: and on which a chiral solution with a vanishing diquark field turns into a

892: saddle-point of $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)$. Inside this boundary, the global

893: minimum of $\Omega(\sigma, \Delta)$ describes a single mixed broken symmetry

894: phase. This phase again exhibits properties similar to those of a chiral

895: phase. It contains in particular a first-order line which ends at a critical

896: point $(\mu_{\rm cm},T_{\rm cm})$ at which the potential $\Omega$ scales as

897: $\Omega(\sigma, \Delta(\sigma)) - \Omega(0,0) \sim (\sigma-\sigma_0)^4$,

898: where $\Delta(\sigma)$ is the diquark field for fixed $\sigma$.

899: 

900: To summarize, the effects of a small mass is linear for the chiral and mixed

901: broken symmetry phases and quadratic for the diquark and trivial phases. The

902: chiral field no longer represents a good order parameter, and the second-order

903: lines of vanishing second derivatives with respect to $\sigma$, i.e.

904: $L_{\chi,2}$ in Eq.~(\ref{sigma_second}) and $L_{\rm mix}$ in

905: Eq.~(\ref{mixline}), disappear. The tricritical points become regular critical

906: points while the tetracritical point in Fig.~5 disappears.

907: 

908: {\bf The $N_c=2$ and $N_c \to \infty$ limits.} In order to make connection

909: with known results and to obtain some insight on the dependence of the phase

910: structure on the number of colors, it is interesting to consider the limits

911: $N_c = 2$ and $N_c \to \infty$.  First of all when $N_c=2$, the Hermitian

912: matrix models realize only a single coupling ratio $B/A = 1$~\cite{VanJac99}. We

913: focus on single-gluon exchange for which the potential in

914: Eq.~(\ref{Omega}) becomes

915: \begin{eqnarray}

916: \Omega_{2}(\sigma,\Delta) & = & A (\sigma^2 +\Delta^2) -

917: \log[(\sigma-\mu)^2+\Delta^2+T^2] - \log[(\sigma+\mu)^2+\Delta^2+T^2].

918: \label{Om2}

919: \end{eqnarray}

920: A rotational symmetry appears at $\mu =0 $ as $\Omega_2$ depends on chiral

921: and diquark fields via the combination $\sigma^2+\Delta^2$.  Diquark and

922: chiral phases do not in this case represent independent states. We find for

923: the combined fields that 

924: \begin{eqnarray}

925: \sigma^2 + \Delta^2 & = & {2 \over A} - T^2,

926: \end{eqnarray}

927: below a critical temperature $T_c = \sqrt{2/A}$, while symmetry is restored

928: above $T_c$. This rotational symmetry is a consequence of the pseudo-reality

929: of $SU(2)$-QCD, a property by which the Dirac operator

930: $D = i \sum_{\mu a} \gamma^\mu \lambda^a A_{\mu a} + m$ commutes with $\tau_2

931: C\gamma^5 K$ where $\tau_2$ is the antisymmetric $2\times 2$ color matrix and

932: $K$ the complex conjugation operator. For $\mu = 0$, this property permits

933: one to arrange color and flavor symmetries into a higher $SU(4)$ symmetry,

934: see for instance~\cite{DiaPet92,SmiVer95,KogSte99}.

935: 

936: At finite $\mu$, however, the $SU(4)$ symmetry is explicitly broken. 

937: The global minimum of $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)$ always has $\sigma = 0$, and

938: the system prefers diquark condensation over chiral symmetry breaking.

939: This results agrees with instanton models~\cite{CarDia99,DiaFor96}, and

940: lattice calculations~\cite{DagKar86}.  We now have a second-order phase

941: transition from an ordered state with $\Delta^2 = 2/A -\mu^2 - T^2$ in the

942: low $T$ and $\mu$ region to a symmetric phase at high $T$ and $\mu$.

943: 

944: The opposite limit $N_c \to \infty$ is more subtle. In microscopic models, it

945: is expected on general grounds that the quark-quark interaction is suppressed

946: with respect to the $\bar qq$ channel by powers of

947: $1/N_c$~\cite{DiaFor96,tHo73}.  In the present model, we observe that diquark

948: condensation disappears as $N_c \to \infty$ if the interaction is

949: single-gluon exchange. Its coupling ratio $B/A = N_c/(2 N_c - 2) \to 1/2$ as

950: $N_c \to \infty$. Thus, we have $B/A \ll 0.139 N_c$ and the only possible

951: topology for the phase diagram is that in Fig.~1. Hence, no diquark

952: condensate forms. Other Hermitean interactions with $B/A \sim O(N_c)$ can

953: however explore the full range of phase diagrams which display diquark

954: condensation. The actual number of possible toplogies is however reduced to

955: five, as $\alpha_2(N_c)\to N_c/\sqrt{8}$ for $N_c \to \infty$ (see Appendix)

956: and Fig.~4 can no longer be realized.

957: 

958: We summarize the variation with $N_c$ of the coupling ratios characterizing a

959: change in topology and of the ratio realized by single-gluon exchange in

960: Table 1.

961: 

962: {\bf Comparison with a microscopic model:} In contrast to microscopic models,

963: the random matrix interaction does not lead to a logarithmic instability of

964: the gap equation near the Fermi surface. To clarify this effect, we consider

965: diquark condensation in a chiral symmetric phase at $T=0$ and

966: compare the random matrix approach to a microscopic model. We  choose

967: here the NJL study of Berges and Rajagopal~\cite{BerRaj99}.  In the random

968: matrix formulation  the gap equation

969: \begin{eqnarray}

970: 2 A \Delta & = & {\Delta \over \Delta^2 + \mu^2}

971: \label{BCSgapRMM}

972: \end{eqnarray}

973: has a non-trivial root $\Delta \sim \sqrt{\mu_c - \mu}$ with

974: $\mu_c = \sqrt{2/A}$. The model of~\cite{BerRaj99} gives an equation of the

975: form

976: \begin{eqnarray}

977: 2 A' \Delta & = & \Delta \int_0^\infty dq q^2 F^4(q) \left({1\over

978:     \sqrt{(q-\mu)^2+\Delta^2 F^4(q)}}+

979: {1\over \sqrt{(q+\mu)^2+\Delta^2 F^4(q)}}\right),

980: \label{BCSgap}

981: \end{eqnarray}

982: where $F(q)$ is an appropriate form factor which falls off over $q \sim

983: \Lambda \sim O(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$. Clearly, the right side of

984: Eq.~(\ref{BCSgap}) contains a singularity for $q \sim \mu$ and $\Delta \to 0$

985: which is absent in Eq.~(\ref{BCSgapRMM}). This singularity has two

986: consequences. First, the behavior of the diquark field for large $\mu$

987: depends sensitively on the form factor. As $\Delta \to 0$, the singularity at

988: $q \sim \mu$ in the right side of Eq.~(\ref{BCSgap}) gives $ 2 A' \approx

989: \mu^2 F^4(\mu) \log \Lambda \mu /\Delta^2$ to logarithmic order. Thus,

990: instead of the square root behavior $\Delta(\mu)\sim (\mu_c - \mu)^{1/2}$ of

991: the random matrix approach, $\Delta$ now vanishes as $\mu \to \infty$ as

992: $\Delta(\mu) \propto \exp(- c/(\mu^2 F^4(\mu)))$, where $c$ is a

993: constant.~\footnote{This result is only true for a smooth cutoff $F(q)$.  For

994:   a sharp cutoff $F(q)=\Theta(\Lambda - \mu)$, where $\Theta(x)$ is the

995:   Heavyside function, the diquark field exhibits the square root

996:   singularity.} This tail is exponentially sensitive to form factors; with

997: regards to establishing the general topology of the phase diagram, such

998: behavior is not qualitatively different from $\Delta = 0$.  The second

999: consequence of the logarithmic singularity in Eq.~(\ref{BCSgap}) is that

1000: $\Delta(\mu)$ must be non-monotonic for intermediate $\mu$.  This profile can

1001: be seen by drawing in the plane $(\Delta,\mu)$ the lines of constant height

1002: for the right side of Eq.~(\ref{BCSgap}): these lines must go around the

1003: point $(\mu_0,0)$ where the logarithmic singularity is the strongest as

1004: $\Delta \to 0$, and $\Delta(\mu)$ reaches a maximum at $\mu_0$.

1005: 

1006: {\bf Color dependency in the chiral fields.} The patterns of symmetry

1007: breaking which we have described can become even richer if we allow the

1008: chiral fields to depend on color. This possibility arises in the instanton

1009: model of Carter and Diakonov~\cite{CarDia99}, who remarked that the

1010: Dyson-Gorkov equations close in color space on the condition that gapped and

1011: ungapped quarks can develop different masses. We studied the effects of this

1012: additional degree of freedom in the limit of zero chemical

1013: potential~\cite{VanJac99} and found no change in the phase structure for

1014: ratios $B/A \le N_c/2$. The situation is different for finite $\mu$.

1015: Choosing different masses for the two gapped and the $N_c-2$ ungapped quarks

1016: leads in some limits to an increase in the pressure of phases with finite

1017: diquark fields. The main consequence is an increase of both the parameter

1018: range and the region in the $(\mu,T)$ plane for which the mixed broken

1019: symmetry phase exists. This result is obvious since the mixed broken symmetry

1020: phase is the only phase which can exploit this additional degree of freedom.

1021: However, there is also a general mechanism at work by which a change of phase

1022: structure always takes place above a certain threshold for the coupling

1023: constants.

1024: 

1025: We wish to illustrate these effects in a few cases and concentrate on the

1026: limit $N_c =3$ and $m = 0$ for clarity. We denote the chiral fields for color

1027: $1$ and $2$ by $\sigma_1$ and that for color $3$ by $\sigma_3$. In order to

1028: permit these fields to be different, we include the projection of the

1029: interaction onto a chiral-$\lambda_8$ channel as described

1030: in~\cite{VanJac99}. For $\mu\neq 0$, the thermodynamical potential becomes

1031: \begin{eqnarray}

1032: \Omega (\sigma_1,\sigma_3,\Delta) &=& A \Delta^2 + B(\beta_1

1033: \sigma_1^2+\beta_2 \sigma_1 \sigma_3 + \beta_3 \sigma_3^2)  

1034: - \log [(\sigma_1 - \mu)^2 + \Delta^2 + T^2]      

1035: - \log [(\sigma_1 + \mu)^2 + \Delta^2 +  T^2] \nonumber \\

1036: && - {1 \over 2} \log [ (\sigma_3 -\mu)^2 + T^2 ] -{1\over 2} \log[(\sigma_3 +

1037: \mu)^2 + T^2],

1038: \label{Omegasplit}

1039: \end{eqnarray}

1040: where 

1041: \begin{eqnarray} 

1042: \beta_1 = {4\over 9} + {C \over 3 B}, \quad

1043: \beta_2 = {4 \over 9} - {2 C \over 3 B}, \quad

1044: \beta_3 = {1 \over 9} + {C \over 3 B},

1045: \label{beta123}

1046: \end{eqnarray}

1047: describe the coupling between $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_3$. $C$ is a coupling

1048: constant associated with the chiral-$\lambda_8$ channel~\cite{VanJac99}. By

1049: fine tuning the various Lorentz and color channels which compose the random

1050: matrix interactions, we can realize a range of ratios $B/C$ for any fixed

1051: $B/A$.~\footnote{This range is $-3/16 \le B/C \le 3/2$ for $B/A < 3/4$ and

1052:   then reduces linearly to $B/C = 3/2$ for $B/A=3/2$.} New patterns of

1053: symmetry breaking only appears when $C > 0$ and the chiral-$\lambda_8$

1054: channel is attractive~\cite{VanJac99}.

1055: 

1056: Consider first single-gluon exchange. The coupling ratios are $B/A = 3/4$ and

1057: $C/B = -3/16$. The chiral-$\lambda_8$ channel is repulsive, and the phases

1058: with the largest pressure always satisfy $\sigma_1 = \sigma_3$, which is the

1059: case shown in Fig.~2. If we now fine tune the interactions so as to increase

1060: $B/C$ to $B/C \sim 3/2$ while keeping $B/A = 3/4$, the phase diagram changes

1061: substantially. The first-order line between the chiral and trivail phases

1062: splits at the point where it meets the diquark transition line into two

1063: first-order lines. Together with the $T=0$ axis, they delimitate a wedge of

1064: mixed broken symmetry phase with $\sigma_1 \neq \sigma_3$ and $\Delta \neq

1065: 0$.  Thus, with an attractive channel $B/C \sim 3/2$ the mixed broken

1066: symmetry phase appears much earlier than previously discussed.  This is an

1067: extreme case. For fixed $B/A$, the mixed broken symmetry phase does not

1068: appear immediately as $B/C$ increases from $0$: there is a threshold value

1069: above which the new phase appears (this value is $B/C \sim 1.29$ for

1070: $B/A=0.75$).  Therefore, it takes large variations of the coupling constants

1071: $B/A$ and $B/C$ away from the values expected for single-gluon exchange to

1072: modify the phase structure of Fig.~2.

1073: 

1074: To complete the picture of the effects of an attractive channel $C>0$,

1075: consider next $B/A = 3/2$. This ratio can only be realized by a color

1076: diagonal interaction for which $B/C = 3/2$~\cite{VanJac99}. In this case,

1077: there is no freedom in fine tuning $B/C$ to other values. The effect of

1078: splitting masses in colors is now maximal. $\beta_2$ in Eq.~(\ref{beta123})

1079: vanishes and $\sigma_3$ decouples from the other two fields. Its gap equation

1080: leads to the same solutions as a pure chiral phase with $\sigma \neq 0$ and

1081: $\Delta =0$ and the phase diagram for the third color is that of Fig.~1. For

1082: $B/A = B/C =3/2$, the partial pressure for colors $1$ and $2$ has the same

1083: form as in the limit $N_c = 2$, see Eq.~(\ref{Om2}). There is then a

1084: rotational symmetry between $\sigma_1$ and $\Delta$ for $\mu = 0$ and

1085: $\sigma_1$ vanishes for $\mu \neq 0$ while $\Delta = 2/A -\mu^2 -T^2$ for

1086: $\mu^2+T^2 \le 2/A$.  The overall phase diagram is obtained by superposing the

1087: two pictures; we have a mixed broken symmetry phase with $\sigma_1=0$,

1088: $\sigma_3 \neq 0$, and $\Delta \neq 0$ on the left of the first-order line

1089: $L_{\chi,1}$ of Eq.~(\ref{Lchi1}). This phase is contiguous to a pure diquark

1090: phase which develops as in Fig.~2 on the right of $L_{\chi,1}$ and below the

1091: semicircle. With respect to Fig.~5, the mixed broken symmetry phase thus

1092: occupies a wider area in the $(\mu,T)$ plane.

1093: 

1094: {\bf A color-$6$ condensate.} It has been suggested that an energy gain may

1095: result if the third color condenses in a spin-$1$ color symmetric

1096: state~\cite{AlfRaj98}. We find no such condensation for single-gluon

1097: exchange.  We can however fine tune the interactions so as to keep $B/A =3/2$

1098: and allow this channel to develop. The Fierz constant for projecting on a

1099: color $6$ is half that for a $\bar 3$ color state. Thus, we can

1100: understand qualitatively how a color-$6$ behaves by repeating our previous

1101: analysis with an additional phase which now may develop inside a semicircle

1102: of radius $\sqrt{2}$ smaller than the radius of the diquark phase.  This

1103: semicircle crosses the first-order line beween chiral and diquark phases at

1104: $B/A \sim 0.754$ and a color-$6$ phase can, in favorable cases, increase the

1105: pressure of the system.  However, as far as QCD is concerned, a color-$6$

1106: condensate should be very small since its threshold ratio is very close to

1107: $B/A = 3/4$.  This is an example of a result which cannot be regarded as

1108: robust: in a microscopic theory, the fate of the color-$6$ phase will

1109: inevitably depend on the details of the interaction and on whether these give

1110: rise to exponential tails for the associated condensation field. By contrast,

1111: the chiral and diquark phases are fully developed for $B/A =3/4$ and the

1112: phase diagram in Fig.~2 should thus be considered robust.

1113: 

1114: 

1115: \section{Conclusions}

1116: \label{s:conclusions}

1117: 

1118: Our random matrix model leads to a thermodynamic potential which has a very

1119: simple form. Yet, it contains enough physics to illustrate in a clear way the

1120: interplay between chiral symmetry breaking and the formation of quark Cooper

1121: pairs.  We have found that this interplay results in a variety of phase

1122: diagrams which can be characterized by a total of only six different

1123: topologies. Single-gluon exchange leads to the topology shown in Fig.~2, a

1124: phase diagram familiar from microscopic models.  We have considered the

1125: chiral and scalar diquark channels, which seem the most promising ones. We

1126: have found that chiral and diquark phases are fully developped for the ratio

1127: realized by single-gluon exchange and that it takes large variations in the

1128: coupling ratios $B/A$ and $C/B$ to depart from that result.  On the other

1129: hand, other less attractive condensation channels seem sensitive to coupling

1130: constant ratios and are expected in microscopic models to depend on the

1131: details of the interactions.  Furthermore, these channels develop 

1132:  weak condensates at best. It is worth keeping in mind that the present picture

1133: is mean-field; we expect that quantum fluctuations will inevitably have large

1134: effects on the weak channels, which should thus not be considered robust.  We

1135:  conclude that QCD with two light flavors should realize the topology

1136: suggested by single-gluon exchange and that this topology is stable against

1137: variations in the detailed form of the microscopic interactions.

1138: 

1139: Many effects lie in the mismatch between the number of colors involved in

1140: each order parameter: all $N_c$ colors contribute to the chiral field, while

1141: a Cooper pair involves two colors. A result of this for $N_c = 3$ is that the

1142: chiral broken phase prevails at low densities. Furthermore, our model

1143: reproduces to a reasonable extent the expected limits at small and large

1144: $N_c$.  We expect such counting arguments to be valid in both microscopic

1145: models and lattice calculations.  More generally, we believe that random

1146: matrix models can provide insight into calculations of QCD at finite density

1147: by providing simple illustrations for many of the mechanisms which are at

1148: work.

1149: 

1150: Not all the phase diagrams that we have studied are directly relevant to QCD.

1151: However, many of their characteristics such as the presence of tricritical

1152: and tetracritical points are generic to systems in which two forms of order

1153: compete. Our model could naturally be extended to the study of nuclear or

1154: condensed matter systems in which such competion takes place. The

1155: construction of a genuine theory seems technically involved at first

1156: glance~\cite{VanJac99} but in fact contains only three basic ingredients: the

1157: identification of the symmetries at play and their associated order

1158: parameters, the knowledge of the elementary excitations in a background of

1159: condensed fields, and the calculation of the range of coupling constants

1160: realized by the random matrix interactions. These three components are

1161: sufficient to build a thermodynamical potential and determine the resulting

1162: phase structures in parameter space.

1163: 

1164: \section*{Acknowledgements}

1165: 

1166: We are grateful for stimulating discussions with G. Carter, D. Diakonov, H.

1167: Heiselberg, and K. Splittorff.

1168: 

1169: \appendix

1170: \section{Calculation of $\alpha_1(N_c)$ and $\alpha_2(N_c)$}

1171: \label{a:alpha1}

1172: 

1173: In this appendix, we calculate the ratios $\alpha_1(N_c)$ and

1174: $\alpha_2(N_c)$, which respectively characterize the onset of the

1175: $\chi\Delta$-phase and the appearance of the tetracritical point.

1176: 

1177: \subsection{The ratio $\alpha_1(N_c)$.}

1178: 

1179: The mixed broken symmetry phase appears first for the coupling ratio $B/A$

1180: for which the instability line $L_{\rm mix}$ of Eq.~(\ref{mixline}) crosses

1181: the first-order line between chiral and diquark phases. This crossing occurs

1182: on the $T=0$ axis. The line $L_{\rm mix}$ meets the $T=0$ axis at $\mu =

1183: \mu_{\rm mix}$, Eq.~(\ref{mumix}),

1184: \begin{eqnarray}

1185: \mu_{\rm mix}^2 = \frac{N_c^2 A}{4 B^2} - \frac{N_c}{2 B}, \nonumber

1186: \end{eqnarray}

1187: while the condition of equal pressure at that point gives

1188: \begin{eqnarray}

1189: \Omega_\Delta - \Omega_\chi = (N_c - 2)+(A+B) \mu_{\rm mix}^2-2 \log \frac{A

1190:   \mu_{\rm mix}^2}{2}+ N_c \log \frac{B \mu_{\rm mix}^2}{N_c} = 0.

1191: \end{eqnarray}

1192: Combining these two equations gives the determining equation for

1193: $\alpha_1 = B/A$,

1194: \begin{eqnarray}

1195: (N_c-2) & + & \frac{N_c}{2 \alpha_1^2} \left(\frac{N_c}{2}-\alpha_1\right) 

1196: \left(1+\alpha_1\right) 

1197: - 2 \log \left[\frac{N_c}{4 \alpha_1} \left(\frac{N_c}{2 \alpha_1}-1\right)

1198: \right] 

1199: + N_c \log \left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{N_c}{2 \alpha_1} -1\right)\right] = 0.

1200: \end{eqnarray}

1201: This is a transcendental relation which needs to be solved numerically for

1202: each $N_c$. In particular, we find 

1203:  $\alpha_1(2)=1$, $\alpha_1(3)=1.05$, 

1204: and $\alpha_1(N_c \to \infty)\sim 0.321 N_c$.

1205: 

1206: \subsection{The ratio $\alpha_2(N_c)$.}

1207: 

1208: Two conditions determine $\alpha_2(N_c)$. Coming from small $B/A$, 

1209: $\alpha_2(N_c)$ corresponds to the ratio at which the wedge of the

1210: $\chi\Delta$-phase reaches the critical point $(\mu_4,T_4)$ of

1211: Eq.~(\ref{tetracritical}). Decreasing $B/A$ from large values,

1212: $\alpha_2(N_c)$ marks the coexistence of the tetracritical point

1213: $(\mu_4,T_4)$ and the tricritical point $(\mu_{3\rm m},T_{3\rm m})$. We now

1214: show that these two conditions are equivalent, and thus that the transition

1215: from Fig.~4 to Fig.~5 is continuous. 

1216: 

1217: To proceed, we concentrate on the region

1218: near $(\mu_4,T_4)$ where we perform a small

1219: field expansion  of the potential $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)$ in

1220: Eq.~(\ref{Omega}),

1221: \begin{eqnarray}

1222: \Omega(\sigma,\Delta) & \approx & \Omega(0,0) + a_0\, \sigma^2 + b_0\, \Delta^2+

1223: \frac{a_1^2}{2}\, \sigma^4 + \frac{b_1^2}{2}\, \Delta^4 +c_1 \,\sigma^2

1224: \, \Delta^2 + {\cal O} ({\rm min}^6(\Delta,\sigma)).

1225: \label{Omegaexpanded}

1226: \end{eqnarray}

1227: Here, the coefficients of the quadratic terms are linear in $\delta \mu = \mu

1228: -\mu_4$ and $\delta T = T-T_4$ and vanish at $(\mu_4,T_4)$, while those of

1229: the quartic terms are

1230: \begin{eqnarray}

1231: a_1^2  = \frac{2 B^2}{N_c}-\frac{A^2 N_c}{4},\quad

1232: b_1^2 = \frac{A^2}{2}, \quad

1233: c_1 =\frac{2 A B}{N_c} -\frac{A^2}{2},

1234: \label{a1b1c1}

1235: \end{eqnarray}

1236: to leading order in $\delta\mu$ and $\delta T$.

1237: 

1238: The condition that the $\chi\Delta$-phase includes $(\mu_4,T_4)$ can be

1239: determined as follows. While $B/A$ increases from below $\alpha_2(N_c)$, the

1240: tip of the wedge of the $\chi\Delta$-phase slides along the the line of equal

1241: pressures between chiral and diquark phases, which we denote by $L_{\chi \to

1242:   \Delta,1}$.  Minimizing $\Omega(\sigma,\Delta)$ in

1243: Eq.~(\ref{Omegaexpanded}) to find the respective pressure in the $\chi$- and

1244: $\Delta$-phases, this line is determined near $(\mu_4,T_4)$ by

1245: \begin{eqnarray}

1246: L_{\chi\to \Delta,1} \approx \frac{b_0^2}{b_1^2} - \frac{a_0^2}{a_1^2} = 0.

1247: \label{firstnear4}

1248: \end{eqnarray}

1249: The left boundary of the $\chi\Delta$-phase is the instability line 

1250: \begin{eqnarray}

1251: L_{\rm mix} \equiv 

1252: \left.

1253: \frac{\partial^2 \Omega}{\partial \Delta^2}

1254: \right|_{\Delta = 0,\sigma = \sigma_0} = 0,

1255: \end{eqnarray}

1256: where $\sigma_0$ is the $\sigma$ field in the chiral phase. From Eq.~(\ref{Omegaexpanded}), this gives near $(\mu_4,T_4)$

1257: \begin{eqnarray}

1258: L_{\rm mix} \approx b_0 - \frac{a_0}{a_1^2}{c_1}=0.

1259: \label{Lmixnear4}

1260: \end{eqnarray}

1261: The tip $P_{\rm mix}$ of the $\chi\Delta$-phase is the intercept of $L_{\rm

1262: mix}$ and $L_{\chi\to\Delta,1}$. From Eqs.~(\ref{firstnear4}) and

1263: (\ref{Lmixnear4}) $P_{\rm mix}$ thus obeys

1264: \begin{eqnarray}

1265: a_0^2 \left(c_1^2 - a_1^2 b_1^2 \right) = 0.

1266: \label{alpha2eq}

1267: \end{eqnarray}

1268: Now, imagine that $B/A$ is strictly smaller but near

1269: $\alpha_2(N_c)$.  Then, $P_{\rm mix} \neq (\mu_4,T_4)$, and we have $a_0 \neq

1270: 0$. The location of $P_{\rm mix}$ is therefore determined by the condition

1271: $a_1^2 b_1^2 = c_1^2$, where the coefficients $a_1$,

1272: $b_1$ and $c_1$ are those of Eq.~(\ref{a1b1c1}) augmented by linear

1273: corrections in $\delta \mu$ and $\delta T$. If we now let $B/A \to

1274: \alpha_2(N_c)$, the tip $P_{\rm mix}$ reaches $(\mu_4,T_4)$ and the linear

1275: corrections in $a_1$, $b_1$, and $c_1$ vanish. Using Eq.~(\ref{a1b1c1}), and

1276: solving $a_1^2 b_1^2 = c_1^2$ for $B/A$ gives

1277: \begin{eqnarray}

1278: \alpha_2(N_c)={B \over A} \equiv \frac{4 N_c - N_c^{3/2} 

1279: \sqrt{2 N_c-4}}{4 (4 - N_c)}, \nonumber

1280: \end{eqnarray}

1281: which is the result stated in Eq.~(\ref{alpha2}).

1282: 

1283: Coming from large ratios $B/A$, the determining condition for $B/A =

1284: \alpha_2(N_c)$ requires that $(\mu_4,T_4)$ obeys Eq.~(\ref{trimix}),

1285: \begin{eqnarray}

1286: \frac{d^4\Omega}{d\sigma^4}(\sigma,\Delta(\sigma)) & = & 0, \nonumber

1287: \end{eqnarray} 

1288: where $\Delta(\sigma)$ is the diquark field in the $\chi\Delta$-phase. Taking

1289: the derivative of Eq.~(\ref{Omegaexpanded}) with respect to $\Delta$, we find

1290: $\Delta^2(\sigma) \approx - (c_1 \sigma^2 +b_0)/b_1^2$ which when inserted

1291: back in Eq.~(\ref{Omegaexpanded}) gives

1292: \begin{eqnarray}

1293: \frac{d^4\Omega}{d\sigma^4}(\sigma,\Delta(\sigma)) & \approx & a_1^2 -

1294: \frac{c_1^2}{b_1^2},

1295: \end{eqnarray}

1296: in the neighborhood of $(\mu_4,T_4)$. Setting the right side to zero, we

1297: recover the previous condition of Eq.~(\ref{alpha2eq}).

1298: 

1299: 

1300: \newpage

1301: 

1302: \begin{figure}[htb]

1303: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1304: \centerline{

1305: \epsffile{pd_fig1.eps}}

1306: \vspace{.5cm}

1307: \caption{

1308:   Phase diagram for $B/A \le 0.418$ and $N_c=3$, as a function of the quark

1309:   chemical potential $\mu$ and the temperature $T$. For this and all the

1310:   following figures, continuous curves represent second-order lines while

1311:   first-order lines are plotted with dots. Here, $\chi$ is the chiral phase

1312:   and $\Delta$ is the diquark phase. First- and second-order lines join

1313:   tangentially at the tricritical point $(\mu_3,T_3)$.}

1314: \label{f:panel1}

1315: \end{figure}

1316: 

1317: \vspace{2cm}

1318: 

1319: \begin{figure}[hb]

1320: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1321: \centerline{

1322: \epsffile{pd_fig2.eps}}

1323: \vspace{0.5cm}

1324: \caption{Phase diagram for the coupling ratio realized by single-gluon 

1325:   exchange, $B/A=0.75$. The transition from the chiral phase $\chi$ to the

1326:   diquark phase $\Delta$ is first-order while that from the $\Delta$ to the

1327:   trivial phase is second-order.}

1328: \label{f:panel2}

1329: \end{figure}

1330: 

1331: 

1332: 

1333: \begin{figure}[ht]

1334: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1335: \centerline{

1336: \epsffile{pd_fig3.eps}}

1337: \vspace{.5cm}

1338: \caption{ Phase diagram for a ratio $B/A=1.054$. The mixed broken symmetry

1339: phase $\chi\Delta$ emerges out of the chiral phase via a second-order

1340: transition at $\mu_{\rm mix}$, and undergoes a first-order transition

1341: towards the diquark phase at $\mu_{1}$.}

1342: \label{f:panel3}

1343: \end{figure}

1344: 

1345: \vspace{2cm}

1346: 

1347: \begin{figure}[hb]

1348: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1349: \centerline{

1350: \epsffile{pd_fig4.eps}}

1351: \vspace{.5cm}

1352: \caption{

1353: Phase diagram for a ratio $B/A=1.1$. Compared to

1354: Fig.~3,

1355: the tricritical point $(\mu_3,T_3)$ no longer exists.

1356: The trivial, chiral, and diquark phases now meet at the new critical point

1357: $(\mu_4,T_4)$. We note in particular that the first and second-order lines 

1358: bordering the chiral phase do not meet tangentially at $(\mu_4,T_4)$.}

1359: \label{f:panel4}

1360: \end{figure}

1361: 

1362: 

1363: 

1364: \begin{figure}[ht]

1365: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1366: \centerline{

1367: \epsffile{pd_fig5.eps}}

1368: \vspace{.5cm}

1369: \caption{Phase diagram for a ratio $B/A=1.4$. Compared to

1370:   Fig.~4, $(\mu_4,T_4)$ has become a tetracritical point, at the

1371:   intersection of the four phases. There is also a new tricritical point

1372:   $(\mu_{3\rm m},T_{3\rm m})$ where the first- and second-order line

1373:   separating the $\chi\Delta$- and the $\Delta$-phases join tangentially.}

1374: \label{f:panel5}

1375: \end{figure}

1376: 

1377: \vspace{2cm}

1378: 

1379: \begin{figure}[hb]

1380: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1381: \centerline{

1382: \epsffile{pd_fig6.eps}}

1383: \vspace{.5cm}

1384: \caption{Phase diagram for a ratio $B/A=1.8$. This topology is characteristic

1385:   of large ratios $B/A$, which favor diquark over chiral condensation. The

1386:   $\Delta$-phase occupies a large part of the phase diagram, at the expense

1387:   of the mixed broken symmetry phase. The chiral phase has completely

1388:   vanished. We note that since Hermitian interactions realize ratios $B/A <

1389:   1.5$, this last topology actually describes a case out of reach for our

1390:   model.}

1391: \label{f:panel6}

1392: \end{figure}

1393: 

1394: 

1395: 

1396: \begin{figure}[hb]

1397: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1398: \centerline{

1399: \epsffile{fields.eps}}

1400: \caption{Order parameters for the coupling ratio of single-gluon exchange,

1401:   $B/A=0.75$. The corresponding phase diagram is shown in Fig.~2.  Chiral and

1402:   diquark fields vanish continuously along the second-order lines.}

1403: \label{f:fields}

1404: \end{figure}

1405: 

1406: \vspace{2cm}

1407: 

1408: \begin{figure}[ht]

1409: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1410: \centerline{

1411: \epsffile{pd_fig3c.eps}

1412: }

1413: \caption{Expanded view of Fig.~3 near the wedge of mixed broken symmetry.

1414:   We note that the second-order line between the $\chi$- to the $\chi\Delta$

1415:   phase does not meet tangentially with the first-order line between the

1416:   $\chi\Delta$- and the $\Delta$-phases, as indicated by the short dashed

1417:   line.}

1418: \label{f:panel3b}

1419: \end{figure}

1420: 

1421: 

1422: 

1423: \begin{figure}[hb]

1424: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1425: \centerline{

1426: \epsffile{pd_fig3b.eps}

1427: }

1428: \caption{

1429:   Expanded view of Fig.~3 near the tricritical point $(\mu_3,T_3)$, showing

1430:   that there is a very short first-order segment between the chiral and

1431:   trivial phases. }

1432: \label{f:panel3c}

1433: \end{figure}

1434: 

1435: \vspace{2cm}

1436: 

1437: \begin{figure}[ht]

1438: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1439: \centerline{

1440: \epsffile{pd_fig5b.eps}}

1441: \vspace{.5cm}

1442: \caption{Phase diagram for the maximal ratio $B/A=1.5$ that can be

1443:   realized by the random matrix interactions. With respect to Fig.~5, the

1444:   thermodynamic competition  favors the mixed broken symmetry phase

1445:   at the expense of the chiral phase.}

1446: \label{f:panel5b}

1447: \end{figure}

1448: 

1449: 

1450: 

1451: \begin{figure}[ht]

1452: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1453: \centerline{

1454: \epsffile{pd_fig1m.eps}}

1455: \vspace{.5cm}

1456: \caption{Phase diagram for a ratio $B/A =0.2$ and a small quark mass

1457: $m$.}

1458: \label{f:fig1m}

1459: \end{figure}

1460: 

1461: \vspace{2cm}

1462: 

1463: \begin{figure}[ht]

1464: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1465: \centerline{

1466: \epsffile{pd_fig2m.eps}}

1467: \vspace{.5cm}

1468: \caption{ Phase diagram for the coupling ratio of single-gluon

1469: exchange, $B/A = 0.75$, and a small quark mass $m \sim 10$ {MeV}.

1470: The first-order line ends at a critical point $(\mu_c,T_c)$.}

1471: \label{f:fig2m}

1472: \end{figure}

1473: 

1474: 

1475: 

1476: \begin{figure}[ht]

1477: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1478: \centerline{

1479: \epsffile{pd_fig3m.eps}}

1480: \vspace{.5cm}

1481: \caption{Phase diagram for $B/A=1.0$ and a small quark mass $m \sim 10$

1482: MeV.}

1483: \label{f:fig3m}

1484: \end{figure}

1485: 

1486: \vspace{2cm}

1487: 

1488: 

1489: \begin{figure}[ht]

1490: \epsfxsize=\figsize

1491: \centerline{

1492: \epsffile{pd_fig4m.eps}}

1493: \vspace{.5cm}

1494: \caption{Phase diagram for $B/A = 1.4$ and a small quark mass $m$. The

1495: first-order line ends at a critical point $(\mu_{\rm cm},T_{\rm cm})$.}

1496: \label{f:fig4m}

1497: \end{figure}

1498: 

1499: 

1500: \newpage

1501: 

1502: \begin{tabular}{l p{1em} r @{.} l p{1em} r @{.} l p{1em} r @{.} l l }

1503: \multicolumn{11}{c}{Table 1. A few characteristic coupling ratios.} \\

1504: \hline 

1505: \hline

1506: Ratio $B/A$ & &

1507: \multicolumn{2}{c}{$N_c = 2$} & 

1508: &

1509: \multicolumn{2}{c}{$N_c = 3$} & 

1510: &

1511: \multicolumn{3}{l}{$N_c \to \infty$} \\

1512: \hline

1513: Onset of diquark condensation &  & \multicolumn{2}{l}{} & 

1514: &

1515: 0 & 418 & 

1516: & 

1517: 0 & 139 &  $N_c$ \\

1518: $\alpha_1(N_c)$ & & 1 & 0 &

1519: & 

1520: 1 & 050 & 

1521: &

1522: 0 & 321 & $N_c$ \\

1523: Disappearance of the tricritical point. & & \multicolumn{2}{l}{} & 

1524: &

1525: 1 & 061 &

1526: &

1527: 0 & 354 & $N_c$ \\

1528: $\alpha_2(N_c)$ & & 1 & 0 & 

1529: &

1530: 1 & 163 & 

1531: &

1532: 0 & 354 & $N_c$ \\

1533: Maximum ratio $N_c/2$ &  & 1 & 0 & 

1534: &

1535: 1 & 5 &

1536: &

1537: 0 & 5 & $N_c$ \\

1538: Single-gluon exchange & & 1 & 0 & 

1539: &

1540: 0 & 75 & 

1541: &

1542: 0 & 5  \\

1543: \hline

1544: \hline

1545: \end{tabular}

1546: 

1547: 

1548: 

1549: 

1550: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

1551: \bibitem{Bar77} 

1552: B. Barrois, Nucl. Phys.  {\bf B129}, 390 (1977);

1553: 

1554: \bibitem{BaiLov84}

1555: D. Bailin and A. Love, Phys. Rept. {\bf 107}, 325 (1984).

1556: 

1557: \bibitem{AlfRaj98} 

1558: M. Alford, K. Rajagopal, and F. Wilczek, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 422}, 247 (1998).

1559: 

1560: 

1561: \bibitem{RapSch98} 

1562:  R. Rapp, T. Sch{\"a}fer, E. V. Shuryak, and M. Velkovsky,

1563: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 81},  53 (1998); hep-ph/9904353.

1564: 

1565: 

1566: 

1567: \bibitem{CarDia99}   

1568: G. W. Carter and D. Diakonov, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 60}, 016004 (1999).

1569: 

1570: \bibitem{BerRaj99}  

1571: J. Berges and K. Rajagopal, Nucl. Phys.  {\bf B538}, 215 (1999).

1572: 

1573: \bibitem{SchKle99}

1574: T. M. Schwarz, S. P. Klevansky, and G. Papp, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 60},

1575: 055205 (1999).

1576: 

1577: 

1578: \bibitem{low}

1579: For studies of diquark condensation at low densities, see also S. Ying,

1580: Phys. Lett B {\bf 285}, 341 (1992); Ann. Phys. (N. Y.) {\bf 250}, 69 (1996);

1581: S. P\'epin, M. C. Birse, J. A. McGovern, and N. R. Walet, hep-ph/9912475.

1582: 

1583: \bibitem{VanJac99}

1584: B. Vanderheyden and A. D. Jackson, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 61}, 076004 (2000).

1585: 

1586: \bibitem{Biel}

1587: See the procceedings of {\it QCD at finite baryon densities}, Bielfeld, 

1588: April 1998, F. Karsh and M. P. Lombardo (Eds.), Nucl. Phys. {\bf A642} (1998).

1589: 

1590: 

1591: \bibitem{Ste96}

1592: M. A. Stephanov, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 76}, 4471 (1996);

1593: Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. {\bf 53}, 469 (1997).

1594: 

1595: \bibitem{KogMat83} 

1596:   J. Kogut, H. Matsuoka, M. Stone, H.W. Wyld, S. Shenker, J.  Shigemitsu, and

1597:   D. K.  Sinclair, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B225} [FS9], 93 (1983).

1598: 

1599: \bibitem{BarBeh86}

1600: I. M. Barbour, N. Behlil, E. Dagotta, F. Karsch, A. Moreao, M. Stone, and

1601: H. W. Wyld, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B275} [FS17] 296, (1986).

1602: 

1603: \bibitem{KogLom95}

1604: J. B. Kogut, M. P. Lombardo, and D. K. Sinclair, Phys. Rev D {\bf 51}, 1282

1605: (1995).

1606:  

1607: \bibitem{BarMor97}

1608: I. M. Barbour, S. E. Morrison, E. G. Klepfish, J. B. Kogut, and

1609: M. P. Lombardo,  Phys. Rev. D {\bf 56}, 7063 (1997).

1610: 

1611: \bibitem{ShuVer93}

1612: E. V. Shuryak and J. J. M. Verbaarschot, Nucl. Phys.

1613:   {\bf A560}, 306 (1993).

1614: 

1615: \bibitem{Ver94} 

1616: J. J. M. Verbaarschot, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 72} 2531

1617:   (1994); Phys. Lett. B {\bf 329}, 351 (1994).

1618: 

1619: \bibitem{Ver99}

1620: For a review, see J. J. M.  Verbaarschot, hep-ph/9902394.

1621: 

1622: \bibitem{BanCas80} 

1623: T. Banks and A. Casher, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B169}, 103 (1980).

1624: 

1625: \bibitem{HalJac98}  

1626: M.A. Halasz, A.D. Jackson, R.E. Shrock, M.A. Stephanov, J.J.M. Verbaarschot,

1627: Phys.Rev. D {\bf 58}, 096007 (1998).

1628: 

1629: \bibitem{JacVer96} 

1630: A. D. Jackson and J. J. M. Verbaarschot, Phys. Rev. {\bf D53}, 7223 (1996).

1631: 

1632: \bibitem{DomGre84} 

1633: I. D. Lawrie and S. Larbach, in {\it Phase Transitions and

1634:     Critical Phenomena}, Edited by C. Domb and J. L.

1635:   Lebowitz (Academic Press, London, 1984), vol. {\bf 9}, p. 1.

1636: 

1637: 

1638: \bibitem{DiaPet92} 

1639: D. Diakonov and V. Petrov, in {\it Quark Cluster Dynamics},

1640:   Lecture Notes in Physics, edited by K. Goeke, P. Kroll, and H. Petry

1641:   (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992) p. 288.

1642: 

1643: \bibitem{SmiVer95} 

1644: A. Smilga and J. J. M. Verbaarschot, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 51}, 829 (1995).

1645: 

1646: \bibitem{KogSte99}

1647: J. B. Kogut, M. A. Stephanov, and D. Toublan, 

1648: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 464},  183  (1999).

1649: 

1650: \bibitem{DiaFor96}

1651: D. Diakonov, H. Forkel, and M. Lutz, Phys. Lett. {\bf B373}, 147 (1996).

1652: 

1653: \bibitem{DagKar86}

1654: E. Dagotta, F. Karsh, and A. Moreo, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 169}, 421 (1986). 

1655: 

1656: \bibitem{tHo73} 

1657: G. 't Hooft, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B72}, 461 (1972).

1658: 

1659: 

1660: 

1661: 

1662: 

1663: \end{thebibliography}

1664: \widetext

1665: \end{document}

1666: 

1667: 

1668: 

1669: 

1670: 

1671: 

1672: 

1673: 

1674: 

1675: