1: \documentstyle[12pt]{elsart}
2: \begin{document}
3: \newcommand{\eq}{\begin{eqnarray}}
4: \newcommand{\en}{\end{eqnarray}}
5:
6: \begin{frontmatter}
7:
8:
9: \date{18 September 2000}
10: \title{
11: $\pi^-p$ atom in ChPT:
12: strong energy-level shift}
13:
14: \author[Tuebingen,Tomsk]{V.E. Lyubovitskij} and
15: \author[Bern,Tbilisi]{A. Rusetsky}
16: \address[Tuebingen]{Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of
17: T\"{u}bingen, Auf der Morgenstelle 14, D-72076 T\"{u}bingen, Germany}
18: \address[Tomsk]{Department of Physics, Tomsk State University,
19: 634050 Tomsk, Russia}
20: \address[Bern]{Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Bern,
21: Sidlerstrasse 5, CH-3012, Bern, Switzerland}
22: \address[Tbilisi]{HEPI, Tbilisi State University, 380086 Tbilisi, Georgia}
23:
24: \date{\today}
25:
26: \maketitle
27:
28: \begin{abstract}
29:
30: The general formula of the $\pi^-p$ atom strong energy-level shift
31: in the $1s$ state is derived in the next-to-leading
32: order in the isospin breaking,
33: and in all orders in chiral expansion. Isospin-breaking corrections
34: to the level shift are explicitly evaluated at order $p^2$ in ChPT.
35: The results clearly demonstrate the necessity to critically reaccess
36: the values of the $\pi N$ scattering lengths, extracted from the energy-level
37: shift measurement by means of the potential model-based theoretical
38: analysis.
39:
40:
41: \noindent {\it PACS:} 03.65.Ge, 03.65.Nk, 11.10.St, 12.39.Fe, 13.40.Ks
42:
43: \noindent {\it Keywords:} Hadronic atoms, Non-relativistic effective
44: Lagrangians, Chiral Perturbation Theory
45:
46:
47: \end{abstract}
48:
49: \end{frontmatter}
50:
51: In the experiment performed at PSI~\cite{PSI1,PSI2}, isospin-symmetric
52: $S$-wave $\pi N$ scattering lengths $a_{0+}^+$ and $a_{0+}^-$ are
53: obtained\footnote{
54: In Refs.~\cite{PSI1,PSI2}, the quantities $b_0=a_{0+}^+$ and $b_1=-a_{0+}^-$
55: are used. Below, we follow the conventions of~\cite{Hoehler}}
56: from the measurements of the $\pi^-p$ atom strong energy-level
57: shift $\varepsilon_{1s}(\pi^-p)$,
58: its decay width into $\pi^0n$ state $\Gamma_{1s}(\pi^-p)$,
59: and the strong energy-level shift of the $\pi^-d$ atom
60: $\varepsilon_{1s}(\pi^-d)$. These three measurements are claimed to be fairly
61: consistent within the error bars, and - by using the technique described in
62: Ref.~\cite{PSI1} - yield the strong $\pi N$ scattering lengths in an
63: accuracy which is unique for hadron physics:
64: $a_{0+}^+=(1.6\pm 1.3)\times 10^{-3}M_{\pi^+}^{-1}$ and
65: $a_{0+}^-=(86.8\pm 1.4)\times 10^{-3} M_{\pi^+}^{-1}$.
66: The scattering length $a_{0+}^-$ may be used as an input
67: in the Goldberger-Miyazawa-Oehme~\cite{GMO}
68: sum rule to determine the $\pi NN$ coupling constant.
69: Recently, a new experiment has been approved
70: on the pionic hydrogen~\cite{Gotta} that will allow one to measure
71: $\Gamma_{1s}(\pi^-p)$ with a much higher accuracy and thus, in
72: principle, to determine
73: the $\pi N$ scattering lengths from the data on pionic hydrogen alone.
74: This, in its turn, will enable one to vastly reduce the model-dependent
75: uncertainties that come from the analysis of three-body problem~\cite{Thomas}.
76: Further, at CERN, the DIRAC collaboration conducts the experiment
77: aimed at the measurement of the $\pi^+\pi^-$ atom lifetime within the
78: $10~\%$ accuracy that will allow one to determine the difference of $\pi\pi$
79: scattering lengths $a_0-a_2$ with a $5~\%$ precision~\cite{DIRAC}. The DIRAC
80: measurement provides a critical test for large/small condensate scenario in
81: QCD: should it turn out that the quantity $a_0-a_2$ is different from the
82: value predicted in standard Chiral Perturbation Theory
83: (ChPT)~\cite{ChPT},
84: one has to conclude that the
85: chiral symmetry breaking in QCD proceeds differently from the standard
86: picture~\cite{Stern}. Finally, the DEAR collaboration~\cite{DEAR}
87: at the DA$\Phi$NE facility (Frascati) plans to measure
88: the energy level shift and lifetime of the $1s$ state in $K^{-}p$
89: and $K^-d$ atoms - with considerably higher precision
90: than in the previous experiment carried out at KEK~\cite{KEK} for
91: $K^-p$ atoms. It is expected~\cite{DEAR}
92: that this will result in a precise determination of the $I=0,1$ $S$-wave
93: scattering lengths - although, of course, one will again be faced
94: with the three-body problem already mentioned. It will be a challenge for
95: theorists to extract from this new information on the $\bar{K}N$
96: amplitude at threshold a more precise value of e.g. the
97: kaon-nucleon sigma term and of the strangeness content of the
98: nucleon~\cite{Gensini}.
99:
100: \vspace*{0.1cm}
101:
102:
103: The relations between the characteristics of hadronic atoms and
104: hadronic scattering lengths in the leading order in isospin breaking are given
105: by the well-known formulae by Deser {\it et al.}~\cite{Deser} -
106: consequently, the measurement of these characteristics provides one
107: with the unique possibility to directly extract these scattering lengths from
108: the data. In order to perform the above-mentioned elaborate tests of
109: QCD at low energy, the precision of the leading-order formula is,
110: however, not sufficient. The theoretical calculations of the hadronic atom
111: observables should be necessarily carried out at the accuracy that
112: matches the accuracy of the experimental measurements.
113: To this end, one may invoke the potential model, assuming, e.g.
114: that the strong interactions which are described by energy-independent
115: local potentials, do not violate the isospin symmetry.
116: This framework, applied to the case of the $\pi^+\pi^-$ atom
117: decay~\cite{Rasche}, failed, however, to agree with the magnitude and
118: even the sign of the correction term to the leading-order formula,
119: evaluated independently in ChPT~\cite{Sazdjian,Atom,Bern1,Bern2}.
120: The reason for this discrepancy is now well understood: the simple
121: potential model described above, does not include the full content of
122: the isospin-breaking effects in QCD. For this reason,
123: in our opinion, it is legitimate to question the applicability
124: of the potential model to the calculation
125: of the energy spectrum and decays of other hadronic atoms
126: (e.g., the $\pi^-p$ atom), as well. These calculations
127: should be also reexamined on the basis of low-energy effective
128: theories where the isospin-breaking effects
129: are completely taken into account.
130:
131:
132:
133: The present paper is aimed at establishing the precise relation
134: between the strong energy-level shift of the $\pi^-p$ atom in the $1s$
135: state, and strong $\pi N$ scattering lengths.
136: This relation, valid at next-to-leading order in isospin breaking,
137: can be used to extract $\pi N$ scattering lengths from the measured
138: energy spectrum of the $\pi^- p$ atom. So far, only potential model
139: calculations have been utilized for this purpose~\cite{PSI1}.
140: In the present paper, however, we use the non-relativistic effective
141: Lagrangian approach and incorporate all isospin-breaking effects.
142: The decay of $\pi^-p$ atom will be considered in a separate
143: publication. Note that the same approach has been
144: already applied to study the $\pi^+\pi^-$ atom decay in
145: ChPT~\cite{Bern1,Bern2}.
146:
147: Our strategy is the follows. First, we write down the general
148: non-relativistic Lagrangian that describes the interactions between
149: nucleons, pions and photons at a very small momenta.
150: This Lagrangian is then used - by means of Feshbach's
151: formalism~\cite{Feshbach} - to calculate the ground-state energy
152: of the $\pi^-p$ atom. The energy is expressed in terms of the
153: couplings of the non-relativistic Lagrangian which, in its turn,
154: through the matching condition are related to the relativistic
155: $\pi^-p$ elastic scattering amplitude at threshold, calculated
156: in ChPT. At the last step, we analyze
157: the isospin-symmetry breaking contributions to this amplitude at
158: $O(p^2)$ in ChPT that, using the already established relation
159: between the amplitude and the bound-state energy, provides
160: us with the isospin-breaking correction to the $1s$ energy level
161: of the $\pi^-p$ atom.
162:
163: The preliminary remarks are in order.
164: The isospin breaking it the $\pi N$ system is due to two physically distinct
165: sources: electromagnetic effects being proportional to the fine structure
166: constant $\alpha$, and up and down quark mass difference $m_d-m_u$.
167: It is convenient to introduce the common counting for these two effects.
168: In particular, one may define\footnote{Note
169: that in Refs.~\cite{Bern1,Bern2}, a slightly different convention
170: $\alpha\sim (m_d-m_u)^2\sim\delta$ was adopted. The counting rule is purely a
171: matter of convention: if we assume the same rule as in the present paper,
172: the $O((m_d-m_u)^2)$ contributions which emerge in
173: Refs.~\cite{Bern1,Bern2}, will be
174: merely relegated to higher orders in the perturbation expansion.}
175: the small parameter $\delta$ so that
176: $\alpha\sim (m_d-m_u)\sim\delta$. With this definition, both
177: $\Delta M_\pi^2=O(\delta)$ and $m_p-m_n=O(\delta)$.
178: Further, in the leading order in the fine-structure constant, the
179: binding energy of the $\pi^- p$ atom ground state is given by the
180: well-known non-relativistic Coulomb-Schr\"{o}dinger value
181: $E_1=-\frac{1}{2}\mu_c\alpha^2$, where $\mu_c$ denotes the reduced mass
182: of $\pi^- p$ system. The leading-order strong energy-level shift is given
183: by the strong amplitude times the square of the Coulomb wave function at
184: the origin and, consequently, is of order $O(\alpha^3)$. We are
185: interested in the leading order isospin-breaking corrections to the
186: strong shift - thus we have to evaluate the bound-state energy at
187: $O(\delta^4)$ that stands either for $O(\alpha^4)$, or for
188: $O(\alpha^3(m_d-m_u))$\footnote{There is one exception from this counting
189: rule. We include the effect due to the electron vacuum polarization as
190: well. Formally this contribution is of
191: order $\alpha^5$, but it is amplified by the large factor $(M_{\pi^+}/m_e)^2$.}.
192:
193: We emphasize that in this paper we deal with the shift of the
194: ground-state level while the quantity that is experimentally measured is the
195: transition energy between $3p-1s$ levels. The strong shift in the $3p$ state
196: is, however, very small (see~\cite{PSI1} and references
197: therein), and for the time being is neglected in our approach.
198:
199: Now, we start with writing down the non-relativistic Lagrangian which
200: will be used to calculate the energy of the $\pi^- p$ atom.
201: This Lagrangian, in general, consists of an infinite tower of
202: operators with an increasing mass dimension - it contains all possible
203: terms that are allowed by discrete $P,~C,~T$ symmetries, rotational
204: invariance and gauge
205: invariance. The convenient building blocks for this Lagrangian,
206: therefore, are: the non-relativistic pion and nucleon fields,
207: their covariant derivatives, and electric (${\bf E}$) and magnetic
208: (${\bf B}$) fields. For the general procedure of the derivation,
209: we refer to Ref.~\cite{Kinoshita}
210: which deals with the same problem in detail, in the context of QED, and merely
211: display the result
212:
213: \eq\label{Lagr-ini}
214: {\cal L}&=&-\frac{1}{4}\, F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}+
215: \psi^\dagger\,\biggl\{i{\cal D}_t-m_p+\frac{{\cal D}^2}{2m_p}
216: +\frac{{\cal D}^4}{8m_p^3}+\cdots
217: \nonumber\\[2mm]
218: &-&c_p^F\,\frac{e\sigma{\bf B}}{2m_p}
219: -c_p^D\,\frac{e({\cal D}{\bf E}-{\bf E}{\cal D})}{8m_p^2}
220: -c_p^S\,\frac{ie\sigma({\cal D}\times{\bf E}-{\bf E}\times{\cal D})}{8m_p^2}
221: +\cdots\biggr\}\,\psi
222: \nonumber\\[2mm]
223: &+&\chi^\dagger\,\biggl\{i\partial_t-m_n+\frac{\nabla^2}{2m_n}
224: +\frac{\nabla^4}{8m_n^3}+\cdots
225: \nonumber\\[2mm]
226: &-&c_n^F\,\frac{e\sigma{\bf B}}{2m_n}
227: -c_n^D\,\frac{e(\nabla{\bf E}-{\bf E}\nabla)}{8m_n^2}
228: -c_n^S\,\frac{ie\sigma(\nabla\times{\bf E}-{\bf E}\times\nabla)}{8m_n^2}
229: +\cdots\biggr\}\,\chi
230: \nonumber\\[2mm]
231: &+&\sum_\pm\pi_\pm^\dagger\,\biggl\{iD_t-M_{\pi^+}
232: +\frac{{\bf D}^2}{2M_{\pi^+}}+\frac{{\bf D}^4}{8M_{\pi^+}^3}+\cdots
233: \nonumber\\[2mm]
234: &\mp& c^R\,\frac{e({\bf D}{\bf E}-{\bf E}{\bf D})}{6M_{\pi^+}^2}
235: +\cdots\biggr\}\,\pi_\pm
236: \nonumber\\[2mm]
237: &+&\pi_0^\dagger\,\biggl\{i\partial_t-M_{\pi^0}+\frac{\nabla^2}{2M_{\pi^0}}
238: +\frac{\nabla^4}{8M_{\pi^0}^3}+\cdots\biggr\}\,\pi_0
239: \nonumber\\[2mm]
240: &+&d_1\,\psi^\dagger\psi\,\pi_-^\dagger\pi_-+
241: d_2(\psi^\dagger\chi\,\pi_-^\dagger\pi_0+h.c.)
242: +d_3\chi^\dagger\chi\,\pi_0^\dagger\pi_0+\cdots\, .
243: \en
244: Here $F_{\mu\nu}$ stands for the electromagnetic field strength tensor,
245: $\psi$, $\chi$, $\pi_{\pm}$ and $\pi_0$ denote the non-relativistic field
246: operators for proton, neutron, charged and neutral pion fields,
247: and ${\cal D}_t\, \psi=\partial_t\, \psi-ieA_0\, \psi$,
248: ${\cal D}\,\psi= \nabla\, \psi+ie{\bf A}\, \psi$,
249: $D_t\, \pi_\pm=\partial_t\,\pi_\pm\mp ieA_0\,\pi_\pm$,
250: ${\bf D}\, \pi_\pm= \nabla\,\pi_\pm\pm ie{\bf A}\,\pi_\pm$ are the covariant
251: derivatives acting on the proton and charged pion fields, respectively.
252: The ellipses stand for the higher-dimensional operators and the counterterms
253: that are needed to render the off-shell Green functions finite in the
254: perturbation theory.
255: The couplings
256: $c_p^F,~c_p^D,~c_p^S,~c_n^F,~c_n^D,~c_n^S,~c^R,~d_1,~d_2,~d_3,\cdots$
257: should be determined from matching of non-relativistic and relativistic
258: amplitudes (see below). In general, the matching procedure determines the
259: same combinations of the non-relativistic couplings that are needed in the
260: bound-state calculations~\cite{Lamb}.
261:
262:
263: The Lagrangian displayed in Eq.~(\ref{Lagr-ini}), contains an infinite tower
264: of operators with the increasing mass dimension. This Lagrangian is used in
265: the perturbation theory to calculate the scattering amplitudes in the
266: one-nucleon, one-pion and one-nucleon-one-pion sectors, with any number of
267: photons, to a given accuracy in the coupling constant $e$ and in the
268: expansion in external 3-momenta.
269: At any order in the perturbative expansion, these amplitudes
270: can be renormalized by adding the appropriate counterterms to the
271: Lagrangian~(\ref{Lagr-ini}).
272: Moreover, these amplitudes coincide with the same
273: amplitudes calculated in the relativistic theory, provided the couplings
274: in the non-relativistic Lagrangian are matched in a sufficient accuracy
275: in $e$. The perturbative calculations in the non-relativistic theory are
276: carried out using the ``threshold expansion''~\cite{Beneke} in all Feynman
277: integrals - this ensures that the counting rules are obeyed so that the
278: higher-dimensional operators do not contribute to the momentum expansion
279: of the amplitudes at lower orders. In particular, this ensures that the mass
280: parameters in the Lagrangian~(\ref{Lagr-ini}) coincide with the physical
281: masses of the particles - there is no mass renormalization.
282: Further, the same non-relativistic Lagrangian is
283: used to calculate the bound-state characteristics. Here, the powers of
284: external momenta ``translate'' into the powers of $e$ and the threshold
285: expansion should be again used to ensure the validity of counting rules.
286: For the details, we refer the reader to Ref.~\cite{Lamb} and references
287: therein. In actual calculations, one always deals with the truncated
288: Lagrangian. In particular,
289: in the present paper we aim at the evaluation of the ground-state energy
290: of the $\pi^-p$ atom at the accuracy $O(\delta^4)$. It can be demonstrated
291: that then it is necessary to construct the non-relativistic
292: Lagrangian that describes correctly all contributions to the $\pi^-p$
293: elastic scattering amplitude at $O(\delta)$, which do not vanish at
294: physical threshold. The Lagrangian displayed in Eq.~(\ref{Lagr-ini}), is
295: sufficient for this purpose. It can be shown that all operators that can be
296: constructed (including the counterterms),
297: except the ones given in Eq.~(\ref{Lagr-ini}), will not
298: contribute to the $\pi^-p$ scattering amplitude at $O(\delta)$ at threshold
299: neither at tree level, nor through loops.
300:
301: \vspace*{1.1cm}
302:
303: Below, we consider briefly the non-relativistic couplings
304: $c_p^F$, $c_p^D$, $c_p^S$, $c_n^F$, $c_n^D$, $c_n^S$, $c^R$.
305: At the accuracy we are working,
306: it is sufficient to match these constants at $O(e^0)$.
307: To this end, one may consider the nucleon and pion electromagnetic
308: form-factors in the external field $A_\mu$. The necessary details, including
309: different normalization of states in the relativistic and
310: non-relativistic theories, are provided in~\cite{Kinoshita}, where the same
311: problem is treated in the context of QED. Below, we merely display the result
312: of the matching
313: \eq\label{matching-c_i}
314: c_p^F=1+\mu_p\hspace*{3.45cm}&,&\quad
315: c_n^F=\mu_n\nonumber\\[2mm]
316: c_p^D=1+2\mu_p+\frac{4}{3}\,\, m_p^2<r_p^2>\quad&,&\quad
317: c_n^D=2\mu_n+\frac{4}{3}\,\, m_n^2<r_n^2>\nonumber\\[2mm]
318: c_p^S=1+2\mu_p\hspace*{3.25cm}&,&\quad
319: c_n^S=2\mu_n\nonumber\\[2mm]
320: c^R=M_{\pi^+}^2<r_\pi^2>\hspace*{2.4cm}&,&
321: \en
322: where $\mu_p$ and $\mu_n$ denote the anomalous magnetic momenta of proton and
323: neutron, respectively, and $<r^2_p>,~<r^2_n>,~<r^2_\pi>$ stand for the
324: charge radii of proton, neutron and charged pion.
325: The remaining constants $d_i,~i=1\cdots 3$ are determined from matching the
326: $\pi N$ scattering amplitudes in different channels.
327:
328: The Lagrangian~(\ref{Lagr-ini}) still contains the terms that do not
329: contribute to the ground-state energy level shift of the $\pi^-p$ atom
330: in the accuracy we are working. In order to simplify this Lagrangian,
331: in the Coulomb gauge
332: we exclude the $A_0$ field by using the equations of motion, and
333: neglect high-dimensional operators that arise in a result of this
334: operation. Further, we neglect the operators that contribute to the
335: $\pi N$ scattering sectors with non-zero total charge, and to the
336: spin-flip part of the $\pi^-p$ elastic scattering amplitude (since the
337: ground state of the $\pi^-p$ atom is an $S$-wave state, the spin-flip
338: part does not contribute due to the rotational invariance). In a
339: result, we arrive at the simplified Lagrangian which is better suited
340: for the bound-state calculations
341: \eq\label{Lagr-fin}
342: {\cal L}'&=&\frac{1}{2}\,\dot{\bf A}^2-\frac{1}{2}\, {\bf B}^2
343: -e^2\,(\psi^\dagger\psi)\,\triangle^{-1}\,(\pi_-^\dagger\pi_-)
344: \nonumber\\[2mm]
345: &+&\psi^\dagger\,\biggl\{i\partial_t-m_p+\frac{\nabla^2}{2m_p}
346: +\frac{\nabla^4}{8m_p^3}+\frac{ie}{2m_p}\,(\nabla{\bf A}+{\bf A}\nabla)
347: \biggr\}\psi
348: \nonumber\\[2mm]
349: &+&\chi^\dagger\,\biggl\{i\partial_t-m_n+\frac{\nabla^2}{2m_n}
350: +\frac{\nabla^4}{8m_n^3}\biggr\}\chi
351: \nonumber\\[2mm]
352: &+&\sum_\pm\pi_\pm^\dagger\,\biggl\{i\partial_t-M_{\pi^+}
353: +\frac{\nabla^2}{2M_{\pi^+}}+\frac{\nabla^4}{8M_{\pi^+}^3}
354: \pm\frac{ie}{2M_{\pi^+}}\,(\nabla{\bf A}+{\bf A}\nabla)
355: \biggr\}\pi_\pm
356: \nonumber\\[2mm]
357: &+&\pi_0^\dagger\,\biggl\{i\partial_t-M_{\pi^0}+\frac{\nabla^2}{2M_{\pi^0}}
358: +\frac{\nabla^4}{8M_{\pi^0}^3}\biggr\}\,\pi_0
359: \nonumber\\[2mm]
360: &+&d_1'\,\psi^\dagger\psi\,\pi_-^\dagger\pi_-+
361: d_2(\psi^\dagger\chi\,\pi_-^\dagger\pi_0+h.c.)
362: +d_3\chi^\dagger\chi\,\pi_0^\dagger\pi_0\, ,
363: \en
364: where
365: \eq\label{lambda}
366: d_1'=d_1-e^2\,\lambda\, ,\quad\quad
367: \lambda=\biggl(\frac{c_p^D}{8m_p^2}+\frac{c^R}{6M_{\pi^+}^2}\biggr)
368: =\frac{1+2\mu_p}{8m_p^2}+\frac{1}{6}\,(\langle r_p^2\rangle+
369: \langle r_\pi^2\rangle)
370: \en
371:
372:
373: For the calculation of the energy-level shift of $\pi^- p$ atom ground state
374: we again, as in Ref.~\cite{Bern1} use the Feshbach's formalism~\cite{Feshbach}.
375: To this end, we first obtain the total Hamiltonian of the system from
376: the Lagrangian~(\ref{Lagr-fin}) by using the canonical formalism
377: \eq\label{Hamiltonian}
378: {\bf H}={\bf H}_{\rm 0}+{\bf H}_{\rm C}+{\bf H}_{\rm R}
379: +e{\bf H}_\gamma+{\bf H}_{\rm S}+e^2\lambda{\bf H}_\lambda
380: ={\bf H}_{\rm 0}+{\bf H}_{\rm C}+{\bf V}\, ,
381: \en
382: where ${\bf H}_0$ is the free Hamiltonian describing photons and
383: non-relativistic pions and nucleons. Further,
384: ${\bf H}_\Gamma=\int d^3{\bf x}\, H_\Gamma,
385: ~\Gamma={\rm C,R,}\gamma,{\rm S},\lambda$, and
386: \eq\label{Hamiltonian-int}
387: H_{\rm C}&=&
388: e^2\,(\psi^\dagger\psi)\,\triangle^{-1}\,(\pi_-^\dagger\pi_-)\, ,
389: \nonumber\\[2mm]
390: H_{\rm R}&=&
391: -\psi^\dagger\, \frac{\nabla^4}{8m_p^3} \,\psi
392: -\chi^\dagger\, \frac{\nabla^4}{8m_n^3} \,\chi
393: -\sum_\pm\pi_\pm^\dagger\, \frac{\nabla^4}{8M_{\pi^+}^3} \,\pi_\pm
394: -\pi_0^\dagger\, \frac{\nabla^4}{8M_{\pi^0}^3} \,\pi_0\, ,
395: \nonumber\\[2mm]
396: H_\gamma&=&
397: -\frac{i}{2m_p}\,\psi^\dagger\, (\nabla{\bf A}+{\bf A}\nabla)\, \psi
398: -\sum_\pm\frac{\pm i}{2M_{\pi^+}}\,
399: \pi_\pm^\dagger\, (\nabla{\bf A}+{\bf A}\nabla)\, \pi_\pm\, ,
400: \nonumber\\[2mm]
401: H_{\rm S}&=&
402: -d_1\,\psi^\dagger\psi\,\pi_-^\dagger\pi_-
403: -d_2(\psi^\dagger\chi\,\pi_-^\dagger\pi_0+h.c.)
404: -d_3\chi^\dagger\chi\,\pi_0^\dagger\pi_0\, ,
405: \nonumber\\[2mm]
406: H_\lambda&=&\psi^\dagger\psi\,\pi_-^\dagger\pi_-\, .
407: \en
408:
409: We treat the problem in the perturbation theory:
410: ${\bf H}_0+{\bf H}_{\rm C}$ is the unperturbed Hamiltonian,
411: whereas ${\bf V}$ is considered as a perturbation.
412: The ground-state solution of the unperturbed Schr\"{o}dinger equation
413: in the CM frame\\
414: $(\tilde E_1-{\bf H}_0-{\bf H}_{\rm C})|\Psi_0({\bf 0};s)\rangle=0$, with
415: $\tilde E_1=m_p+M_{\pi^+}+E_1$, is given by
416: \eq\label{Psi_0}
417: |\Psi_0({\bf 0};s)\rangle=\int\frac{d^3{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^3}\,\,\Psi_0({\bf p})
418: \,\, b_+^\dagger({\bf p},s)\,a_-^\dagger(-{\bf p})\, |0\rangle\, ,
419: \en
420: where $a_-^\dagger({\bf p})$ and $b_+^\dagger({\bf p},s)$
421: denote creation operators for non-relativistic $\pi^-$ and proton
422: acting on the Fock space vacuum,
423: $s$ is the projection of the proton (atom) spin, and
424: $\Psi_0({\bf p})$ stands for the non-relativistic Coulomb wave function in the
425: momentum space.
426:
427: Now, we are going to evaluate the energy-level shift of the ground
428: state due to the perturbation Hamiltonian ${\bf V}$.
429: To this end, we again, as in Ref.~\cite{Bern1}, look for the poles
430: of the scattering operator ${\bf T}(z)=({\bf H}_{\rm C}+{\bf V})+
431: ({\bf H}_{\rm C}+{\bf V}){\bf G}_0(z){\bf T}(z)$ on the second
432: Riemann sheet in the complex $z$-plane: the real and imaginary parts of the
433: pole position give, by definition, the energy and the decay width of the
434: metastable bound state. The free and Coulomb Green operators are defined as
435: ${\bf G}_0(z)=(z-{\bf H}_0)^{-1}$ and
436: ${\bf G}(z)=(z-{\bf H}_0-{\bf H}_{\rm C})^{-1}$, respectively.
437: Further, we define the ``Coulomb-pole removed'' Green function as
438: $\hat {\bf G}(z)={\bf G}(z)(1-{\bf \Pi})$, where ${\bf \Pi}$ denotes the
439: projector onto the Coulomb ground state $\Psi_0$~(\ref{Psi_0}).
440: The $\pi N$ scattering states in the sector with the total charge $0$ are
441: defined as
442: $|{\bf P},{\bf p};s\rangle_+=b_+^\dagger({\bf p}_1,s)\,
443: a_-^\dagger({\bf p}_2)\, |0\rangle$ and
444: $|{\bf P},{\bf p};s\rangle_0=b_0^\dagger({\bf p}_1,s)\,
445: a_0^\dagger({\bf p}_2)\, |0\rangle$
446: ($a_0^\dagger({\bf p})$ and $b_0^\dagger({\bf p},s)$ denote the creation
447: operators for the $\pi^0$ meson and neutron, respectively).
448: The center-of mass and relative momenta are defined by
449: ${\bf P}={\bf p}_1+{\bf p}_2$,
450: ${\bf p}=\eta^{(A)}_2{\bf p}_1-\eta^{(A)}_1{\bf p}_2$,
451: $A=+,0$, and
452: $\eta^{(+)}_1=m_p/(m_p+M_{\pi^+})$, $\eta^{(+)}_2=M_{\pi^+}/(m_p+M_{\pi^+})$,
453: $\eta^{(0)}_1=m_n/(m_n+M_{\pi^0})$, $\eta^{(0)}_2=M_{\pi^0}/(m_n+M_{\pi^0})$.
454: We remove the CM momenta from the matrix elements of any operator
455: ${\bf R}(z)$ by introducing the notation
456: \eq\label{CM}
457: _A\langle {\bf P},{\bf q};s|{\bf R}(z)|
458: {\bf 0},{\bf p};s'\rangle_B=
459: (2\pi)^3\delta^3({\bf P})\,
460: ({\bf q},s|{\bf r}_{AB}(z)|{\bf p};s')\, .
461: \en
462:
463: In general, the expression for the matrix elements of ${\bf r}_{AB}(z)$
464: contains the spin-nonflip ad the spin-flip parts that are defined in the
465: following manner
466: \eq\label{flip-nonflip}
467: ({\bf q};s|{\bf r}_{AB}(z)|{\bf p};s')=
468: \delta_{ss'}({\bf q}|{\bf r}^{\bf n}_{AB}(z)|{\bf p})
469: +i(\sigma_{ss'}\cdot [\,{\bf p}\times {\bf q}\, ])\,
470: ({\bf q}|{\bf r}^{\bf f}_{AB}(z)|{\bf p})\, .
471: \en
472:
473:
474: Below, we define the ``Coulomb-pole removed'' transition operator
475: that satisfies the equation
476: \eq\label{pole-removed}
477: {\bf M}(z)={\bf V}+{\bf V}\hat {\bf G}(z){\bf M}(z)\, .
478: \en
479:
480:
481: With the use of the Feshbach's formalism and the definitions given above,
482: it is straightforward to
483: demonstrate that the scattering operator ${\bf T}(z)$ develops the pole at
484: $z=\bar z$ where $\bar z$ is the solution of the following equation
485: \eq\label{pole-position}
486: \bar z-\tilde E_1-(\Psi_0|{\bf m}^{\bf n}_{++}(\bar z)|\Psi_0)=0\, ,
487: \en
488: where $({\bf p}|\Psi_0)=\Psi_0({\bf p})$ and ${\bf m}^{\bf n}_{++}(z)$ is
489: related to ${\bf M}(z)$ through the definitions~(\ref{CM}) and
490: (\ref{flip-nonflip}).
491:
492: In order to get the shift of the ground-state energy,
493: the quantity ${\bf m}^{\bf n}_{++}(z)$ is determined perturbatively
494: from Eq.~(\ref{pole-removed}). The iteration series that emerge from
495: Eq.~(\ref{pole-removed}), can be truncated since the higher-order
496: terms do not contribute to the energy at $O(\delta^4)$. Using the
497: explicit expression of ${\bf V}$ given by Eq.~(\ref{Hamiltonian}),
498: replacing $\hat {\bf G}(z)$ by ${\bf G}_0(z)$ whenever possible,
499: and retaining only those terms that contribute at the accuracy we are
500: working, the operator ${\bf M}(z)$ can be written in the form
501: ${\bf M}(z)={\bf U}(z)+{\bf W}(z)$, where
502: \eq\label{uw}
503: {\bf U}(z)&=&{\bf H}_{\rm R}
504: +e^2{\bf H}_\gamma {\bf G}_0(z){\bf H}_\gamma
505: +e^2\lambda{\bf H}_\lambda\, ,
506: \nonumber\\[2mm]
507: {\bf W}(z)&=&{\bf H}_{\rm S}+{\bf H}_{\rm S}\hat {\bf G}(z){\bf H}_{\rm S}
508: +{\bf H}_{\rm S}{\bf G}_0(z){\bf H}_{\rm S}{\bf G}_0(z){\bf H}_{\rm S}\, ,
509: \en
510:
511: At the accuracy $O(\delta^4)$, the energy of the bound state is equal to
512: $\bar z=\tilde E_1+\Delta E^{\rm em}_1+\epsilon_{1s}$, where
513: \eq\label{solution-key}
514: \Delta E^{\rm em}_1
515: ={\rm Re}\, (\Psi_0|{\bf u}^{\bf n}_{++}(\tilde E_1)|\Psi_0)+E^{\rm vac}\, ,
516: \quad
517: \epsilon_{1s}
518: ={\rm Re}\, (\Psi_0|{\bf w}^{\bf n}_{++}(\tilde E_1)|\Psi_0)\, .
519: \en
520: Here ${\bf u}^{\bf n}_{++}(z)$, ${\bf w}^{\bf n}_{++}(z)$ are related to
521: ${\bf U}(z)$, ${\bf W}(z)$ through the definitions (\ref{CM}) and
522: (\ref{flip-nonflip}), and
523: $E^{\rm vac}$ stands for the contribution due to the electron vacuum
524: polarization (the corresponding term is added ``by hand'', see below).
525:
526: Using explicit expressions~(\ref{Hamiltonian-int}), we obtain
527: \eq\label{Re}
528: &&\hspace*{-0.6cm}
529: {\rm Re}\, (\Psi_0|{\bf u}^{\bf n}_{++}(\tilde E_1)|\Psi_0)=
530: -\frac{5}{8}\,\alpha^4\mu_c^4\,
531: \frac{m_p^3+M_{\pi^+}^3}{m_p^3M_{\pi^+}^3}
532: -\frac{\alpha^4\mu_c^3}{m_p M_{\pi^+}}+4\alpha^4\mu_c^3\lambda\, ,
533: \\[2mm]
534: &&\hspace*{-0.6cm}
535: {\rm Re}\, (\Psi_0|{\bf w}^{\bf n}_{++}(\tilde E_1)|\Psi_0)=
536: \frac{\alpha^3\mu_c^3}{\pi}\, \biggl(
537: -d_1+d_1^2\, (\,\xi+\frac{\alpha\mu_c^2}{\pi}\, (\ln\alpha-1))
538: +\frac{\mu_0^2q_0^2}{4\pi^2}\, d_2^2d_3\biggr)\, ,
539: \nonumber
540: \en
541: where $\mu_0$ is the reduced mass of the $\pi^0n$ system, and
542: \eq\label{xi}
543: \xi&=&\frac{\alpha\mu_c^2}{2\pi}\biggl\{
544: (\mu^2)^{d-3}\biggl(\frac{1}{d-3}-\Gamma'(1)-\ln 4\pi\biggr)
545: +\ln\frac{(2\mu_c)^2}{\mu^2}-1\biggr\}\, ,
546: \nonumber\\[2mm]
547: q_0&=&\bigl[ 2\mu_0(m_p+M_{\pi^+}-m_n-M_{\pi^0})\bigr]^{1/2}
548: \en
549: Here $d$ and $\mu$ denote the dimension of space and the scale of the
550: dimensional regularization, respectively
551: (we use the dimensional regularization scheme throughout the paper).
552:
553: The vacuum polarization contribution, which is calculated separately, should
554: be added to the electromagnetic energy shift. The modification of Coulomb
555: potential due to electron vacuum polarization is given by the well-known
556: expression~\cite{Atom}
557: \eq\label{vacuum-potential}
558: \Delta V^{\rm vac}(r)=-\frac{4}{3}\,\alpha^2
559: \int\frac{d^3{\bf k}}{(2\pi)^3}\,{\rm e}^{i{\bf k}{\bf r}}
560: \int_{4m_e^2}^\infty\frac{ds}{s+{\bf k}^2}\,
561: \frac{1}{s}\biggl(1+\frac{2m_e^2}{s}\biggr)
562: \sqrt{1-\frac{4m_e^2}{s}}\, ,
563: \en
564: where $m_e$ denotes the electron mass.
565: Applying the first-order perturbation theory, we find
566: \eq\label{vac-pol}
567: &&\hspace*{-0.3cm}
568: E^{\rm vac}=\int d^3{\bf r}\,\Psi_0^2({\bf r})\,
569: \Delta V^{\rm vac}(r)
570: =-\frac{\alpha^3\mu_c}{3\pi}\,\eta^2\Phi(\eta),\quad
571: \eta=\frac{\alpha\mu_c}{m_e}\, ,
572: \\[2mm]
573: &&\hspace*{-0.3cm}
574: \eta^2\Phi(\eta)=\frac{1}{\eta^3}\biggl(2\pi-4\eta+\frac{3\pi}{2}\,\eta^2
575: -\frac{11}{3}\,\eta^3\biggr)
576: +\frac{2\eta^4-\eta^2-4}{\eta^3\sqrt{\eta^2-1}}\,
577: \ln(\eta+\sqrt{\eta^2-1})\, .
578: \nonumber
579: \en
580:
581: The calculation of the electromagnetic energy-level shift is now complete.
582: In order to compare our results with those given in Ref.~\cite{PSI1}, it is
583: convenient to define
584: \eq\label{em-comparison}
585: \tilde E_1+\Delta E_1^{\rm em}=E^{\rm KG}+E^{\rm fin}+E^{\rm vac}+
586: E^{\rm rel}\, ,
587: \en
588: where
589: \eq\label{em-individual}
590: E^{\rm KG}&=&
591: -\frac{1}{2}\, \mu_c \alpha^2\,\biggl(1+\frac{5\alpha^2}{4}\biggr)\, ,
592: \nonumber\\[2mm]
593: E^{\rm fin}&=&\frac{2}{3}\,\alpha^4\mu_c^3\,
594: (\langle r_p^2\rangle+\langle r_\pi^2\rangle)\, ,
595: \\[2mm]
596: E^{\rm rel}&=&-\frac{1}{2}\,\mu_c\alpha^4\,\biggl(
597: \frac{\mu_c}{4(m_p+M_{\pi^+})}+\frac{m_p^2}{(m_p+M_{\pi^+})^2}-1
598: -\frac{2\mu_p M_{\pi^+}^2}{(m_p+M_{\pi^+})^2}\biggr)\, ,
599: \nonumber
600: \en
601: and $E^{\rm vac}$ is given by Eq.~(\ref{vac-pol}). In Table~1
602: we collect various contributions to the electromagnetic energy-level shift
603: calculated using the same input parameters, as in
604: Ref.~\cite{PSI1}. As can be seen
605: from Table~1, the calculated values of the electromagnetic
606: shift almost coincide.
607:
608: \begin{figure}[t]
609: {\small
610: {\bf Table 1.}
611: Contributions to the electromagnetic binding energy of the $\pi^-p$
612: atom (eV). Higher-order corrections: vacuum
613: polarization correction (order $\alpha^3$) and vertex correction have not
614: been calculated.
615:
616: \vspace*{.3cm}
617:
618: \noindent
619: \begin{tabular}{ l l r r }
620: \hline\hline
621: Corrections & Notation & \hspace*{1.2cm} Ref.~\cite{PSI1} & \hspace*{1.2cm} Our \\
622: \hline
623: Point Coulomb, KG equation &$E^{\rm KG}$ & $-3235.156$ & $-3235.156$ \\
624: Finite size effect (proton, pion) &$E^{\rm fin}$ & $0.102$ & $0.100$ \\
625: Vacuum polarization, order $\alpha^2$ &$E^{\rm vac}$ & $-3.246$ & $-3.241$ \\
626: Relativistic recoil, proton spin and & & & \\
627: anomalous magnetic moment &$E^{\rm rel}$ & $0.047$ & $0.047$ \\
628: Vacuum polarization, order $\alpha^3$ & & $-0.018$ & \\
629: Vertex correction & & $0.007$ & \\
630: \hline\hline
631: \end{tabular}
632:
633: }
634:
635: \vspace*{.5cm}
636:
637: \end{figure}
638:
639:
640: In order to complete the calculation of the strong energy-level shift, one
641: has to match at the accuracy $O(\delta)$ the particular combination of
642: the non-relativistic couplings $d_i,~i=1\cdots 3$ that appears in
643: Eq.~(\ref{Re}). To this end, we consider the scattering operator
644: \eq\label{TR}
645: &&{\bf T}_{\rm R}(z)={\bf V}_{\rm R}+{\bf V}_{\rm R}{\bf G}_{\rm R}(z)
646: {\bf T}_{\rm R}(z)\, ,
647: \nonumber\\[2mm]
648: &&{\bf V}_{\rm R}={\bf H}_{\rm C}+e{\bf H}_\gamma+{\bf H}_{\rm S}+
649: e^2\lambda{\bf H}_\lambda\, ,\quad
650: {\bf G}_{\rm R}(z)=(z-{\bf H}_0-{\bf H}_{\rm R})^{-1}\, .
651: \en
652:
653: In the scattering operator ${\bf T}_{\rm R}(z)$, all kinematical insertions
654: contained in ${\bf H}_{\rm R}$ are summed up in the external lines
655: (see~\cite{Lamb} for the details). We calculate the matrix element of the
656: scattering operator ${\bf T}_{\rm R}(z)$ between the $\pi^-p$ states at
657: $O(\delta)$. After removing the CM momentum, the spin-nonflip part of
658: this matrix element on energy shell is equal to
659: \eq\label{T-delta}
660: &&\hspace*{-0.9cm}
661: ({\bf q}|{\bf t}^{\bf n}_{{\rm R},++}(z)|{\bf p})=
662: -\frac{4\pi\alpha}{|{\bf q}-{\bf p}|^2}-\frac{4\pi\alpha}{4m_pM_{\pi^+}}\,
663: \frac{({\bf q}+{\bf p})^2}{|{\bf q}-{\bf p}|^2}
664: +{\rm e}^{2i\alpha\theta_{\rm C}(|{\bf p}|)}\,
665: ({\bf q}|\bar {\bf t}^{\bf n}_{{\rm R},++}(z)|{\bf p})\, ,
666: \nonumber\\
667: &&
668: \en
669: where the (divergent) Coulomb phase in the
670: dimensional regularization scheme is given by
671: \eq\label{phase}
672: \theta_{\rm C}(|{\bf p}|)=\frac{\mu_c}{|{\bf p}|}\,
673: \mu^{d-3}\,\biggl(\frac{1}{d-3}-\frac{1}{2}(\Gamma'(1)+\ln 4\pi)\biggr)
674: +\frac{\mu_c}{|{\bf p}|}\,\ln\frac{2|{\bf p}|}{\mu}\, ,
675: \en
676: and
677: \eq\label{T-threshold}
678: {\rm Re}\,({\bf q}|\bar {\bf t}^{\bf n}_{{\rm R},++}(z)|{\bf p})=
679: -\frac{\pi\alpha\mu_c d_1}{|{\bf p}|}
680: +\frac{\alpha\mu_c^2d_1^2}{\pi}\, \ln\frac{|{\bf p}|}{\mu_c}+e^2\lambda
681: \nonumber\\[2mm]
682: -d_1+\frac{\mu_0^2 q_0^2}{4\pi^2}\,d_2^2d_3
683: +d_1^2\xi+\cdots\, ,
684: \en
685: where ellipses stand for the terms that vanish at threshold.
686:
687: In order to carry out the matching, we consider the elastic $\pi^-p$
688: scattering amplitude $T_{\pi^-p\rightarrow\pi^-p}$, calculated in the
689: relativistic theory at $O(\delta)$\footnote{
690: Note that, in order to have the same sign as in the non-relativistic
691: definition, the sign of the relativistic amplitude is defined by $S=1-iT$.}.
692: This amplitude can be uniquely decomposed
693: into the piece containing all diagrams that are made disconnected by
694: cutting one photon line, and the remainder:
695: $T_{\pi^-p\rightarrow\pi^-p}=T_{ex}+T_1$, with
696: \eq\label{splitting}
697: &&\hspace*{-0.8cm}
698: T_{ex}=\frac{e^2}{t}\,\bar u(p_1s)\biggl\{ \gamma_\mu F_1(t)+i\sigma_{\mu\nu}
699: (p_1-q_1)^\nu\,\frac{F_2(t)}{2m_p}\,\biggr\}\, u(q_1s')\,(p_2+q_2)^\mu\,f(t)
700: \, ,
701: \en
702: where $(q_1,s),~q_2$ and $(p_1,s'),~p_2$ are the four-momenta and spin of
703: outgoing/incoming particles, $t=(q_1-p_1)^2$,
704: and $F_i(t)$ and $f(t)$ denote, respectively,
705: the nucleon and pion electromagnetic form factors.
706: Then, from the matching condition
707: $T_{\pi^-p\rightarrow\pi^-p}=(2E_q2E_p2w_q2w_p)^{1/2}
708: ({\bf q};s|{\bf t}_{{\rm R},++}(z)|{\bf p};s')$,
709: where $E_q,E_p$ and $w_q,w_p$ denote the
710: relativistic energies of the outgoing/incoming nucleons and pions,
711: respectively, one may conclude, that the spin-nonflip
712: part $T_1^{\bf n}$ of the remainder amplitude $T_1$ should have the following
713: threshold behavior
714: \eq\label{behaviour}
715: {\rm Re}\,\biggl\{\,
716: {\rm e}^{ -2i\alpha\theta_{\rm C}(|{\bf p}|)}\,T_1^{\bf n}\biggr\}=
717: \frac{B_1}{|{\bf p}|}+B_2\ln\frac{|{\bf p}|}{\mu_c}-8\pi(m_p+M_{\pi^+})\,
718: {\cal A}+\cdots\, ,
719: \en
720: where ${\bf p}$ denotes the relative momentum of $\pi^- p$ pair in the
721: CM frame, $B_1,~B_2$ do not depend on ${\bf p}$, and
722: \eq\label{curly-A}
723: -\frac{2\pi}{\mu_c}{\cal A}=
724: -d_1+\frac{\mu_0^2 q_0^2}{4\pi^2}\,d_2^2d_3+d_1^2\xi\,
725: \en
726: where ${\cal A}$ is the regular part of $\pi^- p$ scattering amplitude
727: at threshold.
728:
729: Substituting Eq.~(\ref{curly-A}) into Eq.~(\ref{Re}), we finally arrive at
730: \eq\label{strong}
731: \epsilon_{1s}=-2\alpha^3\mu_c^2\, {\cal A}\,(1-2\alpha\mu_c\,
732: (\ln\alpha-1)\,{\cal A})+\cdots\, ,
733: \en
734: where the UV divergence contained in the quantity $\xi$, has been cancelled.
735:
736: The equation~(\ref{strong}) is the main result of the present paper -
737: it gives the relation between the measured strong energy-level shift of
738: the $\pi^- p$ atom and the $\pi^- p$ scattering amplitude at threshold,
739: defined by Eqs.~(\ref{splitting}) and (\ref{behaviour}). This relation is
740: valid at $O(\delta)$, and in all orders in the chiral expansion.
741: The threshold amplitude still contains the isospin-breaking effects.
742: Consequently, in order to extract from the experimental data
743: the $\pi N$ scattering lengths which are defined for
744: the case with no isospin symmetry violation, one has to single out the
745: isospin-breaking effects in the amplitude. To this end, one may invoke ChPT -
746: below, we present the results of the calculations at the tree level.
747:
748: In order to evaluate the $\pi N$ scattering amplitude, we use the effective
749: chiral pion-nucleon Lagrangian at $O(p^2)$~\cite{GSS,Meissner,Becher}.
750: The amplitude is given by the following expression
751: \eq\label{amplitude}
752: {\cal A}&=&a_{0+}^++a_{0+}^-+\epsilon=\frac{1}{8\pi(m_p+M_{\pi^+})
753: F_\pi^2}\,\,\biggl\{
754: m_pM_{\pi^+}-\frac{g_A^2m_pM_{\pi^+}^2}{m_n+m_p+M_{\pi^+}}
755: \nonumber\\[2mm]
756: &+&m_p(-8c_1M_{\pi^0}^2+4(c_2+c_3)M_{\pi^+}^2-4e^2f_1-e^2f_2)\biggr\}\, ,
757: \en
758: where $c_i,~f_i$ denote the low-energy constants in the $O(p^2)$ chiral
759: pion-nucleon Lagrangian, $g_A$ is the nucleon axial-vector coupling
760: constant~\cite{GSS,Meissner,Becher}, and in our calculations we use the value
761: $F_\pi=92.4~{\rm MeV}$. The scattering lengths
762: $a_{0+}^+,~a_{0+}^-$ are
763: calculated in the isospin symmetric theory with $e=0$, $m_u=m_d$ and
764: where, by convention, the masses of the pions and nucleons are taken equal
765: to the physical masses of the charged pion and proton, respectively.
766: With this convention, the isospin-breaking correction to the $\pi^-p$ elastic
767: scattering amplitude at $O(p^2)$ is equal to
768: \eq\label{epsilon}
769: \epsilon=\frac{m_p}{8\pi(m_p+M_{\pi^+})F_\pi^2}\,\,\biggl\{
770: 8c_1(M_{\pi^+}^2-M_{\pi^0}^2)-4e^2f_1-e^2f_2\biggr\}\, .
771: \en
772:
773: Below, we present the results of the numerical analysis for the
774: isospin-breaking correction to the $\pi^-p$ atom energy-level shift.
775: In order to evaluate the second term in the brackets in Eq.~(\ref{strong}),
776: one may safely approximate ${\cal A}=a_{0+}^++a_{0+}^-$ and use the scattering
777: lengths given in Ref.~\cite{PSI2}: the total correction coming from this term
778: amounts up to $+0.66\times 10^{-2}$.
779: Further, in order to evaluate the isospin-breaking correction to the
780: $\pi^-p$ scattering amplitude at threshold given by Eq.~(\ref{epsilon}),
781: one has to specify the values of the $O(p^2)$ low-energy constants
782: $c_1$, $f_1$ and $f_2$. We use the value of $c_1$
783: determined from the fit of the elastic $\pi N$ scattering
784: amplitude at threshold to KA86 data~\cite{private}:
785: $c_1=-0.925~{\rm GeV}^{-1}$. The value of the constant $f_2$
786: can be extracted from the proton-neutron electromagnetic mass
787: difference~\cite{Reports}: $e^2f_2=(-0.76\pm 0.3)~{\rm MeV}$. The
788: determination of the constant $f_1$ from data is however, problematic. For
789: this reason, in our analysis we have used order-of-magnitude estimate for
790: this constant: $-|f_2|\leq f_1\leq |f_2|$.
791:
792:
793: \begin{figure}[t]
794: \vspace{9.1cm}
795: \special{psfile=fig_1.ps voffset=-50 hoffset=-25
796: hscale=80 vscale=80 angle=0}
797: \caption{\it
798: Determination of $\pi N$ scattering lengths from the pionic hydrogen and
799: pionic deuterium measurements. Solid line corresponds to the energy-level
800: shift calculations at $O(p^2)$ in ChPT, and the dashed lines - to the
801: potential model results\cite{PSI1}
802: \label{fig1} }
803: \end{figure}
804:
805:
806: The prediction for the $\pi^-p$ ground-state energy-level shift based on
807: $O(p^2)$ calculations in ChPT, strongly deviate from the predictions of the
808: potential model. The prediction for the total isospin-breaking correction
809: in the strong energy-level shift, defined according to~\cite{PSI1}
810: $\epsilon_{1s}=\epsilon_{1s}^{LO}(1+\delta_{\epsilon})$, where
811: $\epsilon_{1s}^{LO}$ stands for the leading-order shift given by
812: Deser formula~\cite{Deser}, is: $\delta_\epsilon=(-4.8\pm 2.0)\cdot 10^{-2}$
813: at $O(p^2)$ in ChPT. This result differs more than twice from the
814: prediction based on the potential model~\cite{PSI1}:
815: $\delta_\epsilon=(-2.1\pm 0.5)\cdot 10^{-2}$, and the uncertainty caused
816: mainly by a poor knowledge of the constant $f_1$, is four times larger
817: than the estimate of the systematic error in the potential model.
818: In demonstration of the above discussion,
819: in Fig.~\ref{fig1} we confront the results of the present analysis with
820: those of the potential model, using the experimental data on hadronic atoms
821: taken from Ref.~\cite{PSI2}.
822:
823: We would like to emphasize that the physical effects encoded in the
824: low-energy constants $c_1$, $f_1$ and $f_2$, are absent in the potential
825: model. Namely, $f_1$ and $f_2$ contain the effect of the
826: direct quark-photon interaction, and the correction proportional to $c_1$
827: contains the effect coming from the dependence of the scattering amplitude on
828: the quark mass - similar effect in the $\pi^+\pi^-$ case constitutes
829: the tree-level ``mass-shift'' correction (see,
830: e.g.~\cite{Sazdjian,Atom,Bern2}).
831: For this reason, the discrepancy between the potential model predictions and
832: the results of the present analysis based on ChPT, does not come to our
833: surprise. It remains to be seen, how the $O(p^2)$ results in ChPT are
834: altered by the loop corrections. A reliable estimate of the constant
835: $f_1$ is also desirable.
836:
837:
838: To conclude, we have derived the general formula that relates the
839: energy-level shift of the $\pi^- p$ atom to the $\pi N$ scattering
840: amplitude at threshold. Numerical analysis carried out on the basis of this
841: formula at $O(p^2)$ in ChPT, already indicates at
842: the necessity to critically reaccess
843: the values of the $\pi N$ scattering lengths, extracted from the energy-level
844: shift measurement by means of the potential model-based theoretical
845: studies.
846:
847: \vspace*{.5cm}
848:
849: {\it Acknowledgments.}
850: We are grateful to J.~Gasser for the current interest in the work and useful
851: suggestions. We thank A.~Badertscher, T.~Becher, D.~Gotta, H.-J.~Leisi,
852: H.~Leutwyler and U.-G.~Mei\ss ner for useful discussions.
853: This work was supported in part by the Swiss National Science
854: Foundation, by TMR, BBW-Contract No. 97.0131 and EC-Contract
855: No. \, ERBFMRX-CT980169 \, (EURODA$\Phi$NE).
856:
857: \newpage
858:
859: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
860: \bibitem{PSI1}
861: D.~Sigg, A.~Badertscher, P.F.A.~Goudsmit, H.J.~Leisi, and G.C.~Oades,
862: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A 609} (1996) 310.
863:
864: \bibitem{PSI2}
865: H.-Ch.~Schr\"oder {\it et al}., Phys. Lett. {\bf B 469} (1999) 25.
866:
867: \bibitem{Hoehler}
868: G.~H\"{o}hler, in Landolt-B\"{o}rnstein, vol. {\bf 9 b2}, ed. H.~Schopper
869: (Springer, Berlin, 1983).
870:
871: \bibitem{GMO}
872: M.L.~Goldberger, H.~Miyazawa, and R.~Oehme, Phys. Rev. {\bf 99} (1955) 986.
873:
874: \bibitem{Gotta}
875: D.~Gotta, "Measurement of the Ground-State Shift and Width in Pionic Hydrogen
876: to the $1\%$ Level: A New Proposal at PSI",
877: $\pi N$ Newslett. {\bf 15} (1999) 276.
878:
879: \bibitem{Thomas}
880: V.M.~Kolybasov and A.E.~Kudryavtsev, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 41} (1972) 510;
881: JETP Lett. {\bf 37} (1983) 611;
882: A.W.~Thomas and R.~Landau, Phys. Rep. {\bf C 58} (1986) 1407;
883: V.M.~Kolybasov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. {\bf 44} (1986) 722;
884: V.V.~Baru and A.E.~Kudryavtsev, Phys. Atom. Nucl. {\bf 60} (1997) 1475;
885: T.E.~Ericson, B.~Loiseau, and A.W.~Thomas,
886: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A 663} (2000) 541.
887:
888: \bibitem{DIRAC}
889: B.~Adeva {\it et al.}, CERN proposal CERN/SPSLC 95-1 (1995).
890:
891: \bibitem{ChPT} J.~Gasser and H.~Leutwyler, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 125}
892: (1983) 325; J.~Bijnens, G.~Colangelo, G.~Ecker, J.~Gasser,
893: and M.E.~Sainio, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 374} (1996) 210.
894:
895: \bibitem{Stern} M.~Knecht, B.~Moussallam, J.~Stern, and N.H.~Fuchs,
896: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 457} (1995) 513; ibid. {\bf B 471} (1996) 445.
897:
898: \bibitem{DEAR}
899: "DA$\Phi$NE exotic atom research: the DEAR proposal",
900: By DEAR collaboration (R.~Baldini et al.), Preprint LNF-95-055-IR, (1995).
901:
902: \bibitem{KEK}
903: M.~Iwasaki {\it et al}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 78} (1997) 3067;
904: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A 639} (1998) 501.
905:
906: \bibitem{Gensini}
907: P.M.~Gensini, Preprint hep-ph/9804344.
908:
909: \bibitem{Deser} S.~Deser, M.L.~Goldberger, K.~Baumann, and
910: W.~Thirring, Phys. Rev. {\bf 96} (1954) 774.
911:
912: \bibitem{Rasche}
913: U.~Moor, G.~Rasche, and W.S.~Woolcock,
914: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A 587} (1995) 747;
915: A.~Gashi, G.C.~Oades, G.~Rasche, and W.S.~Woolcock,
916: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A 628} (1998) 101.
917:
918: \bibitem{Sazdjian}
919: H.~Jallouli and H.~Sazdjian, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 58} (1998) 014011;
920: Erratum-ibid {\bf D 58} (1998) 099901; H.~Sazdjian, Preprint hep-ph/9809425.
921:
922: \bibitem{Atom}
923: V.E.~Lyubovitskij and A.G.~Rusetsky, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 389} (1996) 181;
924: V.E.~Lyubovitskij, E.Z.~Lipartia, and A.G.~Rusetsky,
925: JETP Lett. {\bf 66} (1997) 783;
926: M.A.~Ivanov, V.E.~Lyubovitskij, E.Z.~Lipartia, and A.G.~Rusetsky,
927: Phys. Rev. {\bf D 58} (1998) 094024.
928:
929: \bibitem{Bern1}
930: A.~Gall, J.~Gasser, V.E.~Lyubovitskij, and A.~Rusetsky,
931: Phys. Lett. {\bf B 462} (1999) 335.
932:
933: \bibitem{Bern2}
934: J.~Gasser, V.E.~Lyubovitskij and A.~Rusetsky,
935: Phys. Lett. {\bf B 471} (1999) 244.
936:
937: \bibitem{Feshbach}
938: H.~Feshbach, Ann. Phys. {\bf 5} (1958) 357; ibid 19 (1962) 287.
939:
940: \bibitem{Kinoshita}
941: T.~Kinoshita and M.~Nio, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 53} (1996) 4909.
942:
943: \bibitem{Lamb}
944: V.~Antonelli, A.~Gall, J.~Gasser, and A.~Rusetsky,
945: Preprint hep-ph/0003118, Annals of Physics (to be published).
946:
947: \bibitem{Beneke}
948: M.~Beneke and V.A.~Smirnov, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 522} (1998) 321.
949:
950: \bibitem{GSS} J.~Gasser, M.E.~Sainio, and A.~\v{S}varc, Nucl. Phys.
951: {\bf B 307} (1988) 779.
952:
953: \bibitem{Meissner} U.-G.~Mei\ss ner and G.~M\"{u}ller,
954: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 556} (1999) 265.
955:
956: \bibitem{Becher} T.~Becher and H.~Leutwyler, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C 9}
957: (1999) 643.
958:
959: \bibitem{private}
960: T.~Becher and H.~Leutwyler, private communication.
961:
962: \bibitem{Reports}
963: J.~Gasser and H.~Leutwyler, Phys. Rep. {\bf 87} (1982) 77.
964:
965: \end{thebibliography}
966:
967:
968: \end{document}
969:
970: