1: \documentstyle[12pt]{article}
2: %=======================================================================
3: \textwidth
4: 16.4cm
5: \oddsidemargin
6: 2.5cm
7: \advance\oddsidemargin
8: by -1in
9: \evensidemargin
10: 0.0cm
11: \advance\evensidemargin
12: by -1in
13: \marginparwidth
14: 1.9cm
15: \marginparsep
16: 0.4cm
17: \marginparpush
18: 0.4cm
19: \topmargin
20: -3.0cm
21: \advance\topmargin
22: by -0.0in
23: \textheight
24: 25.0cm
25: %=========================================================================
26: \makeindex
27: \renewcommand{\topfraction} {0.8}
28: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction} {1}
29: \renewcommand{\textfraction} {0}
30: \renewcommand{\floatsep} {-3cm}
31: \renewcommand{\floatpagefraction} {1}
32: \pagestyle{plain}
33: \newcommand\norm{\normalsize}
34: \newcommand\la{\langle}
35: \newcommand\ra{\rangle}
36: \newcommand\beq{\begin{equation}}
37: \newcommand\noi{\noindent}
38: \newcommand\eeq{\end{equation}}
39: \newcommand\beqn{\begin{eqnarray}}
40: \newcommand\eeqn{\end{eqnarray}}
41: \newcommand{\doublespace} {
42: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch} {1.6}
43: \large\normalsize}
44: % \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
45: \def\sel{\sigma_{el}^{VN}}
46: \def\Pom{{\bf I\!P}}
47: \def\inf{\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}}
48: \def\lsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
49: \raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}} %less than or approx. symbol
50: \def\gsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
51: \raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}} %greater than or approx. symbol
52: %=========================================================================
53:
54:
55: \begin{document}
56:
57: \vspace*{10mm}
58: \begin{center}
59: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
60: {\LARGE \bf Is It Possible to Study the Wave Function \\
61: \vspace*{2mm}
62: of $2S$ Vector Mesons at HERA ?}
63: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
64:
65: \vspace*{10.0mm}
66:
67: {{\Large Jan Nemchik}}
68:
69: \end{center}
70: %\maketitle
71: \bigskip
72: \begin{center}
73: \noi
74: {\sl
75: Institute of Experimental Physics SAS, \\
76: Watsonova 47, \\
77: 04353 Kosice, \\
78: Slovakia}
79:
80: \end{center}
81: \bigskip
82: \vspace*{3.0cm}
83:
84: %***************
85: \begin{abstract}
86: %***************
87: We present a short review of anomalous properties in diffractive photo- and
88: electroproduction of radially excited $V'(2S)$ vector mesons.
89: Using the color dipole gBFKL phenomenology we analyze
90: anomalous $Q^{2}$ and energy dependence of the
91: production cross section, $V'(2S)/V(1S)$ production
92: ratio, the diffraction slope and anomalous
93: $t$ behaviour of the differential cross section $d\sigma/dt$.
94: The origin of these anomalies is based on the interplay of the nodal
95: structure of $V'(2S)$ radial wave function with the energy and dipole
96: size dependence of the dipole cross section and the diffraction slope.
97: We analyze how a different pattern of anomalous behaviour of $V'(2S)$
98: production leads to a different position of the node in the wave function
99: and discuss how that node position can be extracted from the data at HERA.
100: %*************
101: \end{abstract}
102: %*************
103: % ----------------------------------------------------------------------
104:
105: \newpage
106: %\doublespace
107: %
108: %
109: %*********************** SECTION 1 ***************************
110: %
111: %
112: %
113: %*********************
114: \section{Introduction}
115: %*********************
116:
117: The main goal of this paper is to present a short
118: review of possible anomalies, which can be observed
119: in diffractive photo-
120: and electroproduction
121: of radially excited $V'(2S)$ vector mesons
122: %
123: %
124: % ===============================
125: \beq
126: \gamma^{*}p \rightarrow V'(2S)p ~~~~~~~~V'(2S) = \rho',
127: \Phi', \omega', \Psi', \Upsilon',...\, .
128: \eeq
129: % ===============================
130: %
131: %
132: Diffractive electroproduction of ground state $V(1S)$
133: vector mesons at high c.m.s. energy $W = \sqrt{s}$
134: is intensively discussed during the last decade
135: and is very convenient for study of the pomeron exchange
136: \cite{DL,KZ91,Ryskin,KNNZ93,KNNZ94,NNZscan,Brodsky,Forshaw,GLM}.
137: %
138: The standard approach to the pQCD is based on the BFKL equation
139: \cite{Kuraev,Balitsky,Lipatov} formulated
140: in the scaling approximation of the infinite gluon correlation
141: radius $R_{c}\rightarrow\infty$ (massless gluons) and
142: of the fixed running coupling $\alpha_{S}=const$.
143: %
144: Later, however, a novel $s$-channel approach
145: to the $LLs$ BFKL equation (running gBFKL approach)
146: has been developed \cite{NZ94,NZZ94} in terms of the color
147: dipole cross section
148: $\sigma(\xi,r)$ ($r$ is the transverse size of
149: the color dipole, $\xi = log ({{W^{2}+Q^{2}} \over {m_{V}^{2}+Q^{2}}})$
150: is the rapidity variable) and incorporates consistently
151: the asymptotic freedom (AF) (i.e. the running QCD coupling $\alpha_{S}(r)$)
152: and the finite propagation radius $R_{c}$ of perturbative gluons.
153:
154: As a consequence of the gBFKL phenomenology for
155: diffractive production of light
156: \cite{NNZscan,NNPZ97} and heavy
157: \cite{NNPZZ98} vector mesons is so-called
158: {\it scanning phenomenon} \cite{NNN92,KNNZ93,KNNZ94,NNZscan};
159: the
160: $V(1S)$ vector meson production amplitude probes the color dipole cross
161: section at the dipole size $r\sim r_{S}$,
162: where the scanning radius $r_{S}$ can be expressed through the scale
163: parameter $A$
164: %
165: % ---------------------------------------------------------------------
166: \beq
167: r_{S} \approx {A \over \sqrt{m_{V}^{2}+Q^{2}}}\, ,
168: \label{eq:1}
169: \eeq
170: % ---------------------------------------------------------------------
171: %
172: where $Q^{2}$ is the photon virtuality,
173: $m_{V}$ is the vector meson mass, $A\approx 6$
174: and slightly rises with $Q^{2}$.
175: Consequently,
176: changing $Q^{2}$ and the mass of the produced
177: vector meson one can
178: probe the dipole cross section $\sigma(\xi,r)$
179: in a very broad range of the dipole
180: sizes $r$.
181: %
182: This fact allows to study the transition
183: from large nonperturbative dipole size $r_{S}\gg R_{c}$
184: to the perturbative region of very short $r_{S}\ll R_{c}$.
185: Futhermore,
186: the scanning
187: phenomenon give a possibility to study one important
188: consequence of the color dipole gBFKL
189: dynamics -
190: the steeper
191: subasymptotic energy dependence of the dipole cross section
192: at smaller dipole sizes ${\bf r}$.
193:
194: Diffractive electroproduction
195: of radially excited $V'(2S)$ vector mesons supplies us
196: with an additional
197: information on the dipole cross section.
198: %
199: The presence of the node in
200: $V'(2S)$ radial
201: wave function leads to
202: a strong cancellation
203: of dipole size contributions to the production amplitude
204: from the region above and below the node position
205: $r_{n}$ (the node effect
206: \cite{KZ91,NNN92,KNNZ93,NNZanom,NNPZ97,NNPZZ98}).
207: For this reason the amplitudes for
208: electroproduction of the $V(1S)$ and $V'(2S)$ vector mesons probe
209: $\sigma(\xi,r)$ in a different way.
210:
211: The node effect as the dynamical mechanism has a lot of
212: very interesting consequences in production of $V'(2S)$
213: vector mesons and can be tested at HERA.
214: Therefore, we present a short review of different aspects
215: and manifestations of the node effect.
216: Firstly, we show the onset of a strong node effect in
217: electroproduction of $V'(2S)$
218: light vector mesons \cite{NNPZ97}, which leads to
219: a very spectacular pattern
220: of anomalous $Q^{2}$ and energy dependence of production
221: cross section. More heavy is the vector meson
222: much weaker is the node effect.
223: However, for electroproduction of $V'(2S)$ heavy vector mesons
224: much weaker node effect
225: still leads to a slightly different $Q^{2}$- and
226: energy dependence of production cross section
227: for $\Psi'$ vs. $J/\Psi$
228: and to a nonmonotonic $Q^{2}$- dependence of
229: the diffraction slope at small
230: $Q^{2}\lsim 5$\,GeV$^{2}$ for $\Psi'$ production
231: \cite{NNPZZ98}.
232: Then we discuss
233: another manifestation of the node effect
234: experimentally confirmed at fixed target and HERA
235: experiments in $J/\Psi$ and $\Psi'$ photoproduction;
236: a strong
237: suppression of diffractive production of $V'(2S)$ vs. $V(1S)$ mesons.
238: The stronger is the node effect the smaller is the $V'(2S)/V(1S)$
239: production ratio.
240: The node effect
241: in conjunction with the emerging gBFKL
242: phenomenology of the diffraction slope
243: \cite{NZZslope,NZZspectrum,NNPZZ98}
244: also leads to a counterintuitive inequality
245: $B(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow \Psi') \lsim B(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow J/\Psi)$
246: \cite{NNPZZ98}, which can be also tested at HERA.
247: However, we show that above counterintuitive inequality $B(2S)<B(1S)$
248: is not always valid for $V'(2S)$ light vector meson production
249: \cite{Nbd00}.
250: Finally, we analyze the node effect and its manifestation
251: resulting in a very spectacular pattern of anomalous $t$ dependence
252: of the differential cross section \cite{Ntd00}.
253: In all the cases the main emphasize will be related to the production of
254: $V'(2S)$ light vector mesons where the node effect is
255: expected to be very strong. Also we find a
256: correspondence between a specific pattern of anomalous behaviours
257: and the position of the node in
258: $V'(2S)$ radial wave function.
259:
260: The paper is organized as follows. In Sect.~2 we present
261: a very short review of the color dipole phenomenology of
262: diffractive photo- and electroproduction of vector mesons
263: In Sect.~3 we analyze the anomalies in production
264: cross section for $V'(2S)$ vector mesons.
265: Sect.~4 is devoted to anomalous pattern of $Q^{2}$
266: and energy dependence of the diffraction slope for
267: $V'(2S)$ production.
268: In Sect.~5 we study anomalous $t$ behaviour of the
269: differential cross section
270: $d\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V'(2S))/dt$ at different $Q^2$
271: and energies.
272: In all the cases we
273: discuss how the position of the node
274: in $V'(2S)$ radial wave function can be extracted from the
275: data. The summary and conclusions are presented in Sect.~6.
276:
277: %
278: %
279: %*********************** SECTION 2 ***************************
280: %
281: %
282: %
283: %*******************************************************
284: \section{Color dipole phenomenology
285: for vector meson production. A short review.}
286: %*******************************************************
287:
288: The light-cone representation introduced in \cite{ks70}
289: represents
290: very popular and powerful tool for study of the dynamics of
291: vector meson diffractive photo- and electroproduction.
292: The central point of this approach is that
293: in the mixed $({\bf{r}},z)$ representation
294: the high energy vector meson can be treated
295: as a system of color dipole described by
296: the distribution
297: of the transverse separation ${\bf{r}}$ of the quark and
298: antiquark given by the $q\bar{q}$ wave function,
299: $\Psi({\bf{r}},z)$, where $z$ is
300: the fraction of meson's light-cone momentum
301: carried by a quark.
302: In this approach the
303: imaginary part of the production
304: amplitude for the real (virtual) photoproduction
305: of vector mesons
306: with the momentum transfer ${\bf{q}}$ can be represented in the
307: factorized form
308: % ---------------------------------------------------------------------
309: \beq
310: {\rm Im}{\cal M}(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V,\xi,Q^{2},{\bf{q}})=
311: \langle V |\sigma(\xi,r,z,{\bf{q}})|\gamma^{*}\rangle=
312: \int\limits_{0}^{1} dz\int d^{2}{\bf{r}}\sigma(\xi,r,z,{\bf{q}})
313: \Psi_{V}^{*}({\bf{r}},z)\Psi_{\gamma^{*}}({\bf{r}},z)\,
314: \label{eq:2}
315: \eeq
316: % ---------------------------------------------------------------------
317: whose normalization is
318: $
319: \left.{d\sigma/ dt}\right|_{t=0}={|{\cal M}|^{2}/ 16\pi}.
320: $
321: In Eq.~(\ref{eq:3}),
322: $\Psi_{\gamma^{*}}({\bf{r}},z)$ and
323: $\Psi_{V}({\bf{r}},z)$ represent the
324: probability amplitudes
325: to find the color dipole of size $r$
326: in the photon and quarkonium (vector meson), respectively.
327: The color dipole distribution in (virtual) photons was
328: derived in \cite{NZ91,NZ94}.
329: $\sigma(\xi,r,z,{\bf{q}})$ in Eq~(\ref{eq:3})
330: is the dipole scattering matrix for $q\bar{q}-N$ interaction.
331: At ${\bf{q}}=0$ it represents
332: the color dipole cross section, which quantifies
333: the interaction of the relativistic
334: color dipole of the dipole size ${\bf{r}}$ with the
335: target nucleon.
336: The dipole cross section $\sigma(\xi,r)$ is flavor
337: independent and represents the universal
338: function of $r$ which describes
339: various diffractive processes in unified form.
340: Energy dependence of the dipole cross section
341: reflexes an importance of the higher Fock states $q\bar{q}g...$
342: at high c.m.s. energy $W$.
343: In the leading-log ${1\over x}$ approximation the
344: effect of higher Fock states can be
345: reabsorbed into the energy dependence
346: of $\sigma(\xi,r)$, which satisfies
347: the gBFKL equation
348: \cite{NZ94,NZZ94} for the energy evolution.
349:
350: At small ${\bf{q}}$ considered in this paper,
351: one can safely neglect
352: the $z$-dependence of $\sigma(\xi,r,z,{\bf{q}})$
353: for light and heavy vector meson production
354: and set $z=\frac{1}{2}$.
355: This follows also from the analysis within double gluon
356: exchange approximation
357: \cite{NZ91} leading to a slow $z$ dependence of
358: the dipole cross section.
359:
360: The detailed discussion about the space-time
361: pattern of diffractive electroproduction of vector mesons
362: is presented in \cite{NNPZ97,NNPZZ98}.
363: The energy dependence of the dipole cross section is quantified
364: in terms of the dimensionless
365: rapidity $\xi=\log{1\over x_{eff}}$, $x_{eff}$ is
366: the effective value of the Bjorken variable
367: %
368: %
369: % ===============================================================
370: \beq
371: x_{eff} =
372: \frac {Q^{2}+m_{V}^{2}}{Q^{2}+W^{2}} \approx
373: \frac{m_{V}^{2}+Q^{2}}{2\nu m_{p}}\, ,
374: \label{eq:3}
375: \eeq
376: % ===============================================================
377: %
378: %
379: where $m_{p}$ and $m_{V}$ is the proton mass and mass of
380: vector meson, respectively.
381: Hereafter, we will write the energy dependence of the dipole
382: cross section in both variables,
383: either in $\xi$ or in $x_{eff}$ whenever convenient.
384:
385: The production amplitudes for the
386: transversely (T) and the longitudinally (L) polarized vector mesons
387: with the small momentum transfer $\bf{q}$
388: can be written in more explicit form \cite{NNZscan,NNPZZ98}
389: % =================================================================
390: \beqn
391: {\rm Im}{\cal M}_{T}(x_{eff},Q^{2},{\bf{q}})=
392: {N_{c}C_{V}\sqrt{4\pi\alpha_{em}} \over (2\pi)^{2}}
393: \cdot~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
394: \nonumber \\
395: \cdot \int d^{2}{\bf{r}} \sigma(x_{eff},r,{\bf{q}})
396: \int_{0}^{1}{dz \over z(1-z)}\left\{
397: m_{q}^{2}
398: K_{0}(\varepsilon r)
399: \phi(r,z)-
400: [z^{2}+(1-z)^{2}]\varepsilon K_{1}(\varepsilon r)\partial_{r}
401: \phi(r,z)\right\}
402: \label{eq:4}
403: \eeqn
404: %=================================================================
405: \beqn
406: {\rm Im}{\cal M}_{L}(x_{eff},Q^{2},{\bf{q}})=
407: {N_{c}C_{V}\sqrt{4\pi\alpha_{em}} \over (2\pi)^{2}}
408: {2\sqrt{Q^{2}} \over m_{V}}
409: \cdot~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
410: \nonumber \\
411: \cdot \int d^{2}{\bf{r}} \sigma(x_{eff},r,{\bf{q}})
412: \int_{0}^{1}dz \left\{
413: [m_{q}^{2}+z(1-z)m_{V}^{2}]
414: K_{0}(\varepsilon r)
415: \phi(r,z)-
416: \partial_{r}^{2}
417: \phi(r,z)\right\}
418: \label{eq:5}
419: \eeqn
420: %==================================================================
421: where
422: %==================================================================
423: \beq
424: \varepsilon^{2} = m_{q}^{2}+z(1-z)Q^{2}\,,
425: \label{eq:6}
426: \eeq
427: %==================================================================
428: $\alpha_{em}$ is the fine structure
429: constant, $N_{c}=3$ is the number of colors,
430: $C_{V}={1\over \sqrt{2}},\,{1\over 3\sqrt{2}},\,{1\over 3},\,
431: {2\over 3},\,{1\over 3}~~$ for
432: $\rho^{0},\,\omega^{0},\,\phi^{0},\, J/\Psi, \Upsilon$ production,
433: respectively and
434: $K_{0,1}(x)$ are the modified Bessel functions.
435: The discussion and parameterization
436: of the light-cone radial wave function $\phi(r,z)$
437: of the $q\bar{q}$ Fock state of the vector meson
438: is given in \cite{NNPZ97}.
439:
440: Following the scanning phenomenon (see Eq.~(\ref{eq:1}))
441: one needs rather high values of $Q^2\gsim 70$\, GeV$^{2}$ to reach the pure
442: perturbative region $r\lsim R_{c}$.
443: Consequently,
444: due to a very slow onset of the pure perturbative region
445: one can easily anticipate
446: a contribution to the production amplitude
447: coming
448: from the semiperturbative and nonperturbative $r\gsim R_{c}$.
449: Following the simplest assumption about an additive property
450: of the perturbative and nonperturbative mechanism of interaction
451: we can represent the contribution of the bare pomeron exchange
452: to $\sigma(\xi,r,{\bf{q}})$ as a sum
453: of the perturbative and nonperturbative component
454: %
455: %===============================================================
456: \footnote{
457: additive property of such a decomposition of the dipole
458: cross section has been already discussed in \cite{NNPZ97,NNPZZ98}}
459: %===============================================================
460: %
461: %
462: % ==============================================================
463: \beq
464: \sigma(\xi,r,{\bf{q}}) =
465: \sigma_{pt}(\xi,r,{\bf{q}})+\sigma_{npt}(\xi,r,{\bf{q}})\,,
466: \label{eq:7}
467: \eeq
468: % ==============================================================
469: %
470: %
471: with the parameterization of both components at small ${\bf{q}}$
472: % ==============================================================
473: \beq
474: \sigma_{pt,npt}(\xi,r,{\bf{q}})=\sigma_{pt,npt}(\xi,r,{\bf{q}}=0)
475: \exp\Bigl(-\frac{1}{2}
476: B_{pt,npt}(\xi,r){\bf{q^{2}}}\Bigr)\,.
477: \label{eq:8}
478: \eeq
479: % ==============================================================
480: Here $\sigma_{pt,npt}(\xi,r,{\bf{q}}=0)
481: = \sigma_{pt,npt}(\xi,r)$ represent the contribution
482: of the perturbative and nonperturbative mechanism to the
483: $q\bar{q}$-nucleon interaction cross section,
484: respectively, $B_{pt}(\xi,r)$ and $B_{npt}(\xi,r)$
485: are the corresponding dipole diffraction slopes.
486:
487: The model predictions include also a
488: small real part of production amplitudes taken
489: in the form \cite{GribMig}
490: %
491: %
492: %------------------------------------------------
493: \beq
494: {\rm Re}{\cal M}(\xi,r) =\frac{\pi}{2}\cdot\frac{\partial}
495: {\partial\xi} {\rm Im}{\cal M}(\xi,r)\,.
496: \label{eq:9}
497: \eeq
498: %
499: %
500:
501: The formalism for calculation of $\sigma_{pt}(\xi,r)$
502: in the leading-log $s$ approximation was developed
503: in \cite{NZ91,NZ94,NZZ94}.
504: The contribution $\sigma_{npt}(\xi,r)$
505: representing the soft nonperturbative component
506: of the pomeron is a simple Regge pole with
507: the intercept $\Delta_{npt}=0$.
508: The particular form together with
509: assumption of
510: the energy independent
511: $\sigma_{npt}(\xi=\xi_{0},r)=\sigma_{npt}(r)$
512: ($\xi_{0}$ corresponds to boundary condition for the gBFKL
513: evolution, $\xi_{0}=log(1/x_{0})$, $x_{0} = 0.03$)
514: allows us to successfully describe the
515: proton structure function at very small $Q^{2}$ \cite{NZHera},
516: the real photoabsorption \cite{NNZscan} and
517: diffractive real and virtual photoproduction of light
518: \cite{NNPZ97} and heavy \cite{NNPZZ98} vector mesons.
519: Besides, the reasonable form of $\sigma_{npt}(r)$
520: was confirmed in the process of the first determination of the dipole
521: cross section from the data on vector meson
522: electroproduction \cite{NNPZdipole} what is shown in Fig.~1. The energy
523: and dipole size dependence of so-extracted $\sigma(\xi,r)$
524: is in a good agreement with the dipole cross section obtained
525: from the gBFKL dynamics \cite{NNZscan,NZHera}.
526: The nonperturbative component of the pomeron
527: exchange plays a dominant
528: role at low NMC energies
529: in the production of the light vector mesons.
530: However, the perturbative component of the pomeron becomes
531: more important with the rising energy also in the nonperturbative
532: region of dipole sizes.
533:
534: %
535: %
536: %------------------------- FIG.1. ----------------------------
537: %
538: %
539: \begin{figure}[tbh]
540: %
541: \special{psfile=dcs-ext.ps angle=0. voffset=-370. hoffset=40.
542: hscale=60. vscale=50.}
543: \begin{center}
544: \vspace{6.2cm}
545: \parbox{13cm}
546: {\caption[Delta]
547: {
548: The dipole size dependence of the dipole cross section
549: extracted from the data on photoproduction
550: and electroproduction of vector mesons.
551: The data are described in \cite{NNZscan}.
552: The dashed and solid curve show the dipole cross section
553: of the model \cite{NZHera,NNZscan} evaluated for
554: the c.m.s. energy $W=15$ and $70$\, GeV respectively.
555: The data points at HERA energies and the corresponding solid curve
556: are multiplied by the factor 1.5.
557: }
558: %-------------------
559: \label{event1}}
560: %-------------------
561: \end{center}
562: %
563: \end{figure}
564: %-------------------------------------------------------------
565: %
566: %
567:
568: The generalization of the color dipole factorization
569: formula (\ref{eq:2}) to the diffraction slope of the
570: reaction $\gamma^{*}p\rightarrow Vp$ reads \cite{NNPZZ98}
571: %
572: %
573: %------------------------------------------------
574: \beq
575: B(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V,\xi,Q^{2})
576: {\rm Im} {\cal M}(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V,\xi,Q^{2},{\bf{q}}=0)=
577: \int\limits_{0}^{1} dz\int d^{2}{\bf{r}}\sigma(\xi,r)~B(\xi,r)
578: \Psi_{V}^{*}(r,z)\Psi_{\gamma^{*}}(r,z)\,.
579: \label{eq:10}
580: \eeq
581: %------------------------------------------------
582: %
583: %
584:
585: The diffraction cone in the color dipole gBFKL approach
586: was studied in detail in \cite{NNPZZ98}.
587: Therefore, here we present only the salient
588: feature of the color diffraction slope $B(\xi,r)$ emphasizing
589: the presence of the geometrical contribution from beam
590: dipole - $r^{2}/8$
591: and the contribution from the target proton size - $R_{N}^{2}/3$:
592: %
593: %
594: %------------------------------------------------
595: \beq
596: B(\xi,r)=
597: \frac{1}{8}r^{2}+\frac{1}{3}R_{N}^{2}+
598: 2\alpha_{\Pom}'(\xi-\xi_{0}) + {\cal O}(R_{c}^{2})\, ,
599: \label{eq:11}
600: \eeq
601: %------------------------------------------------
602: %
603: %
604: where $R_{N}$ is the radius of the proton.
605: The term $2\alpha_{\Pom}'(\xi-\xi_{0})$
606: describe the familiar Regge growth of $B(\xi,r)$ for
607: the quark-quark scattering.
608: The geometrical contribution to the diffraction
609: slope from the target proton size ${1\over 3}R_{N}^{2}$
610: persists for all the dipole sizes
611: $r\gsim R_{c}$ and $r\lsim R_{c}$. The last term in (\ref{eq:11})
612: is also associated with the proton size and is negligibly small.
613: The diffractive scattering of large color dipole has
614: been also studied in the paper \cite{NNPZZ98}.
615: Here we assume the conventional Regge rise of the diffraction
616: slope for the soft pomeron \cite{NNPZZ98}
617: %
618: %
619: %------------------------------------------------
620: \beq
621: B_{npt}(\xi,r)=\Delta B_{d}(r)+\Delta B_{N}+
622: 2\alpha_{npt}^{'}(\xi-\xi_{0})\,,
623: \label{eq:12}
624: \eeq
625: %------------------------------------------------
626: %
627: %
628: where $\Delta B_{d}(r)$ and $\Delta B_{N}$ stand for the contribution
629: from the beam dipole and target nucleon size.
630: As a guidance the
631: data on the pion-nucleon scattering
632: \cite{Schiz} were used, which suggest $\alpha'_{npt}=0.15$\,GeV$^{-2}$.
633: In (\ref{eq:12}) the proton size contribution
634: is
635: %
636: %
637: %------------------------------------------------
638: \beq
639: \Delta B_{N}={1\over 3}R_{N}^{2}\, ,
640: \label{eq:13}
641: \eeq
642: %------------------------------------------------
643: %
644: %
645: and
646: the beam dipole contribution has been proposed
647: to have a form \cite{NNPZZ98}
648: %
649: %
650: %------------------------------------------------
651: \beq
652: \Delta B_{d}(r) = {r^{2} \over 8}\cdot
653: {r^{2}+aR_{N}^{2} \over 3r^{2}+aR_{N}^{2}}\,,
654: \label{eq:14}
655: \eeq
656: %------------------------------------------------
657: %
658: %
659: where $a$ is a phenomenological parameter, $a\sim 1$.
660: We take $\Delta B_{N}=4.8\,{\rm GeV}^{-2}$.
661: Then the pion-nucleon diffraction slope is reproduced with
662: reasonable value of the parameter $a$ in the formula (\ref{eq:14}):
663: $a=0.9$ for $\alpha'_{npt}=0.15$\,GeV$^{-2}$.
664:
665: Energy dependence of the
666: gBFKL diffraction slope $B(\xi,r)$ (see Eq.~(\ref{eq:11})
667: and \cite{NZZslope}) can be evaluated
668: through the energy
669: dependent effective Regge slope $\alpha_{eff}'(\xi,r)$
670: %
671: %
672: % ===================================================================
673: \beq
674: B_{pt}(\xi,r) \approx \frac{1}{3}<R_{N}^{2}> + \frac{1}{8}r^{2}
675: + 2\alpha_{eff}'(\xi,r)(\xi-\xi_{0}).
676: \label{eq:15}
677: \eeq
678: % ====================================================================
679: %
680: %
681: The effective Regge slope $\alpha_{eff}'(\xi,r)$
682: varies
683: with energy differently
684: at different dipole size
685: \cite{NZZslope}.
686: At fixed scanning radius and/or $Q^{2}+m_{V}^{2}$,
687: it decreases with energy.
688: At fixed rapidity $\xi$
689: and/or $x_{eff}$ (\ref{eq:3}),
690: $\alpha_{eff}'(\xi,r)$
691: rises with $r\lsim 1.5$\,fm.
692: At fixed energy it is a flat function
693: of the scanning radius.
694: At asymptotically large $\xi$ ($W$),
695: $\alpha_{eff}'(\xi,r)\rightarrow \alpha_{\Pom}'=0.072$\,GeV$^{-2}$.
696: At lower and HERA energies the subasymptotic
697: $\alpha_{eff}'(\xi,r)\sim (0.15-0.20)$\,GeV$^{-2}$ and is very
698: close to $\alpha_{soft}'$ known from the Regge phenomenology
699: of soft scattering.
700: It means that the gBKFL dynamics predicts a substantial rise
701: with the energy and dipole size of the diffraction slope $B(\xi,r)$
702: in accordance with
703: the energy and dipole size dependence of the effective
704: Regge slope $\alpha_{eff}'(\xi,r)$ and due to a presence of the
705: geometrical components $\propto r^{2}$ in (\ref{eq:15}) and
706: $\Delta B_{d}(r)\propto r^{1.7}$
707: in (\ref{eq:12}) (see also (\ref{eq:14}))
708: % ==========================================
709: \footnote{Dipole size behaviour of
710: $\Delta B_{d}(r)$ (\ref{eq:14}) representing the geometrical
711: contribution to the
712: dipole diffraction slope $B_{npt}(\xi,r)$ (\ref{eq:12}) for
713: diffractive scattering of large color dipole has the standard
714: $r^{2}$- dependence at small $r^{2}\ll aR_{N}^{2}$
715: and large $r^{2}\gg aR_{N}^{2}$ values of dipole size,
716: respectively.
717: In the intermediate region $r^{2}\sim aR_{N}^{2}$,
718: which corresponds to production of $V(1S)$ and $V'(2S)$ light
719: vector mesons, the dipole size dependence of $\Delta B_{d}(r)$
720: can be parameterized by the power function $r^{\alpha}$
721: with $\alpha\sim 1.7$.}.
722: % ==========================================
723: The overall dipole diffraction slope contains contributions
724: from both $B_{npt}(\xi,r)$ and $B_{pt}(\xi,r)$ and
725: corresponding geometrical component has $r^{\alpha}$-
726: behaviour with $1.7< \alpha\lsim 2.0$.
727: Therefore, for discussions on the qualitative level
728: in the subsequent sections we
729: assume (with a reasonable accuracy)
730: an approximate $r^{2}$- dependence of the
731: geometrical component contribution
732: to the dipole diffraction slope.
733: The first direct evaluation of the dipole diffraction slope
734: from the data on photo- and electroproduction of vector mesons
735: is presented in \cite{Nbsys00} and is depicted in Fig.~2.
736:
737: %
738: %
739: %------------------------- FIG.2. ----------------------------
740: %
741: %
742: \begin{figure}[tbh]
743: %
744: \special{psfile=b-ext.ps angle=0. voffset=-340. hoffset=30.
745: hscale=70. vscale=50.}
746: \begin{center}
747: \vspace{7.5cm}
748: \parbox{13cm}
749: {\caption[Delta]
750: {
751: The dipole size dependence of the dipole cross section
752: extracted from the data on photoproduction
753: and electroproduction of vector mesons.
754: The data are described in \cite{Nbsys00}.
755: The dashed and solid curve show the dipole diffraction slope
756: of the model \cite{NZZslope,NNPZZ98} evaluated for
757: the c.m.s. energy $W=15$ and $70$\, GeV respectively.
758: The data points at HERA energies and the corresponding solid curve
759: are multiplied by the factor 1.5.
760: }
761: %-------------------
762: \label{event2}}
763: %-------------------
764: \end{center}
765: %
766: \end{figure}
767: %-------------------------------------------------------------
768: %
769: %
770:
771: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
772: %
773: %
774: %
775: %*********************** SECTION 3 ***************************
776: %
777: %
778: %
779: %****************************************
780: \section{Anomalous cross section in electroproduction of $2S$
781: radially excited vector mesons}
782: %****************************************
783:
784: The matrix element for $V'(2S)$ diffractive production
785: contains the contributions
786: from the region of dipole sizes
787: above and below the node position $r_{n}$.
788: As soon as the exact node effect encounters
789: the $Q^{2}$- and energy dependent cancellations
790: from the soft (large size) and hard (small size)
791: contributions to the $V'(2S)$ production amplitude
792: become important.
793: The strong $Q^{2}$ dependence of the
794: node effect is connected with the $Q^{2}$ behaviour
795: of the scanning radius $r_{S}$ (see (\ref{eq:1})).
796: The energy dependence of the cancellations comes from
797: a different energy dependence of the dipole cross section
798: $\sigma(\xi,r)$ at different dipole sizes $r$.
799:
800: We would like to emphasize from the very beginning
801: that the predictive power is weak and the predictions
802: are strongly model dependent
803: in the region of $Q^{2}$ and energy
804: when the node effect becomes exact.
805: Presenting and discussing in the subsequent sections
806: the model predictions for $V'(2S)$ vector mesons
807: we do not insist on the precise pattern of an anomalous
808: behaviour. We present the model
809: calculations only
810: as an illustration of possible anomalies, which can be
811: tested at HERA
812: %
813: %================================================================
814: \footnote{
815: Manifestations of the node
816: effect in electroproduction on nuclei were discussed earlier, see
817: \cite{NNZanom} and \cite{BZNFphi}}.
818: %================================================================
819: %
820: We will concentrate mainly on the production of $V'(2S)$
821: light vector mesons
822: because of a strong node effect and the fact that
823: the new data obtained at HERA will be analyzed soon.
824: In the nonrelativistic limit of heavy quarkonia, the
825: node effect will not depend on the polarization of the virtual photon
826: and of the produced vector meson. Not so for light vector mesons
827: \cite{NNPZ97}.
828: The wave functions of $(T)$ and $(L)$ polarized (virtual)
829: photon are different.
830: Different regions of $z$ contribute to the
831: ${\cal M}_{T}$ and ${\cal M}_{L}$.
832: Different scanning radii
833: for production of $(T)$ and $(L)$ polarized vector mesons
834: and different energy dependence of $\sigma(\xi,r)$ at
835: these scanning radii
836: lead to a different $Q^{2}$ and energy dependence of the
837: node effect in production of $(T)$ and $(L)$ polarized
838: $V'(2S)$ vector mesons.
839:
840: There are two possible scenarios for the node effect:
841: the undercompensation
842: and the overcompensation regime \cite{NNZanom}.
843: In the undercompensation scenario,
844: the $V'(2S)$ production amplitude
845: $\langle V'(2S)|\sigma(\xi,r)|\gamma^*\rangle$
846: is dominated by the positive valued contribution coming from small
847: dipole sizes $r\lsim r_{n}$
848: and the $V(1S)$ and $V'(2S)$ photoproduction
849: amplitudes have the same sign.
850: This scenario corresponds namely to the production
851: of $V'(2S)$ heavy vector mesons ($\Psi'(2S)$, $\Upsilon'(2S),...)$.
852: In the overcompensation scenario,
853: the $V'(2S)$ production amplitude
854: is dominated by the negative valued contribution coming from large
855: dipole sizes $r\gsim r_{n}$,
856: and the $V(1S)$ and $V'(2S)$ photoproduction
857: amplitudes have the opposite sign.
858: This scenario can correspond to the production of $V'(2S)$
859: light vector mesons, $\rho'(2S)$, $\omega'(2S)$ and $\phi'(2S)$
860: %
861: %================================================================
862: \footnote{discussion on the experimental determination of the
863: relative sign of the $V'(2S)$ and $V(1S)$ production amplitudes
864: using the so-called S\" oding-Pumplin effect \cite{SP1,SP2}
865: has been already presented in \cite{NNPZ97}}.
866: %================================================================
867: %
868:
869: Let us start with (T) polarization.
870: In the undercompensation scenario
871: \cite{NNZanom} a decrease of
872: of the scanning radius
873: with $Q^{2}$ leads to
874: a rapid decrease of the negative contribution coming from
875: large $r\gsim r_{n}$ and to a rapid
876: rise of the $V'(2S)/V(1S)$ production ratio with $Q^{2}$.
877: The stronger the suppression of the real photoproduction of
878: the $V'(2S)$ state, the steeper the $Q^{2}$ dependence
879: of the $V'(2S)/V(1S)$ production ratio expected at small $Q^{2}$.
880: In Fig.~3 we predict
881: the $\rho'(2S)/\rho^{0}$ and $\phi'(2S)/\phi^{0}$ (T) polarized
882: production ratios using the wave functions from \cite{NNPZ97}.
883: They rise by more than one order of magnitude
884: in the range $Q^{2}\lsim 0.5$\,GeV$^{2}$.
885: At larger $Q^{2}\gsim 1$\,GeV$^{2}$, when the production
886: amplitudes are dominated by dipole size $r\ll r_{n}$
887: the $V'(2S)$ and $V(1S)$
888: production cross sections become comparable.
889: \cite{NNZanom,NNZscan}.
890:
891: %
892: %
893: %------------------------- FIG.3. ----------------------------
894: %
895: %
896: \begin{figure}[tbh]
897: %
898: \special{psfile=cs-f1.ps angle=0. voffset=-335. hoffset=40.
899: hscale=70. vscale=55.}
900: \begin{center}
901: \vspace{6.9cm}
902: \parbox{13cm}
903: {\caption[Delta]
904: {
905: The color dipole model
906: predictions for the $Q^2$ and $W$ dependence of the ratios
907: $\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow \rho'(2S))/
908: \sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow \rho^{0})$ and
909: $\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow \phi'(2S))/
910: \sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow \phi^{0})$
911: for the (T) and (L)
912: polarization of the vector mesons.
913: }
914: %-------------------
915: \label{event3}}
916: %-------------------
917: \end{center}
918: %
919: \end{figure}
920: %-------------------------------------------------------------
921: %
922: %
923:
924: Using the wave functions from \cite{NNPZ97} we predict
925: the overcompensation scenario at $Q^{2}=0$
926: for $(L)$ polarized $\rho'(2S)$ and $\phi'(2S)$ mesons.
927: Consequently,
928: the decrease with $Q^{2}$ of the scanning
929: radius $r_{S}$ leads to the {\sl exact} cancellation
930: of the small and large distance contributions at some value
931: $Q_{c}^{2}\sim 0.5$\,GeV$^{2}$ for both the $\rho'_{L}(2S)$ and
932: $\phi'_{L}(2S)$ production.
933: The value of $Q_{c}^{2}$ is
934: slightly different for the imaginary and the real part of
935: $V'(2S)$ production amplitude.
936: We can not insist on the precise value of
937: $Q_{c}^{2}$ which is subject to the soft-hard cancellations,
938: our emphasis is on the likely scenario with the exact node
939: effect at a finite $Q_{c}^{2}$.
940:
941: At larger $Q^{2}$ and/or smaller
942: scanning radius one enters the above described
943: undercompensation scenario.
944: For both $(T)$ and $(L)$
945: polarized photons, $V'(2S)/V(1S)$ production ratios rise steeply with $Q^{2}$
946: on the scale $Q^{2}\sim 0.5$\,GeV$^{2}$.
947: At large $Q^{2}$ where the production of
948: $(L)$ polarized mesons dominates, the
949: $\rho'(2S)/\rho^{0}$ and $\phi'(2S)/\phi^{0}$ cross section ratios
950: level off at $\sim 0.3-0.4$ (see Fig.~3).
951: This large-$Q^{2}$
952: limiting value of the
953: production cross section ratios
954: depends on the ratio of $V'(2S)$ and $V(1S)$ wave functions
955: at the origin, which in potential models is subject to
956: the detailed form of the confining potential
957: \cite{Potential}.
958:
959: %
960: %
961: %------------------------- FIG.4. ----------------------------
962: %
963: %
964: \begin{figure}[tbh]
965: %
966: \special{psfile=cs-f2.ps angle=0. voffset=-315. hoffset=50.
967: hscale=65. vscale=50.}
968: \begin{center}
969: \vspace{9.3cm}
970: \parbox{13cm}
971: {\caption[Delta]
972: {
973: The color dipole model
974: predictions of the forward differential cross sections
975: $d\sigma_{L,T}(\gamma^* \rightarrow V')/dt|_{t=0}$ for
976: transversely(T)
977: (top boxes) and longitudinally (L)
978: (middle boxes) polarized radially excited
979: vector mesons $\rho'(2S)$ and
980: $\phi'(2S)$ and for the polarization-unseparated
981: $d\sigma(\gamma^* \rightarrow V')/dt|_{t=0}=
982: d\sigma_{T}(\gamma^* \rightarrow V')/dt|_{t=0}+\epsilon
983: d\sigma_{L}(\gamma^* \rightarrow V')/dt|_{t=0}$ for
984: $\epsilon = 1$ (bottom boxes)
985: as a function of the c.m.s. energy $W$
986: at different values of $Q^2$.
987: }
988: %-------------------
989: \label{event4}}
990: %-------------------
991: \end{center}
992: %
993: \end{figure}
994: %-------------------------------------------------------------
995:
996:
997: The energy dependence of the $\rho'(2S)$ and $\phi'(2S)$
998: real photoproduction is shown in Fig.~4 and has again a
999: specific pattern. In the color dipole gBFKL dynamics,
1000: the negative contribution
1001: to the $V'(2S)$ production amplitude coming
1002: from
1003: $r\gsim r_{n}$,
1004: has a slower growth with energy than the positive
1005: contribution coming
1006: from $r\lsim r_{n}$. Consequently,
1007: in the undercompensation regime (which corresponds to $(T)$
1008: polarization)
1009: the destructive interference
1010: of these two contributions becomes weaker at higher energy and
1011: we predict a growth with energy of the
1012: $V'_{T}(2S)/V_{T}(1S)$ production cross section ratios (see Fig.~3)
1013: and $(T)$ polarized forward production cross sections (see Fig.~4 -
1014: top boxes).
1015:
1016: For $(L)$ polarized $V_{L}'(2S)$
1017: we have a chance of
1018: studying the $Q^{2}$ and energy dependence in the overcompensation
1019: scenario.
1020: At moderate energy and
1021: $Q^{2}$ very close to $Q_{c}^{2}$ but
1022: still $\lsim Q_{c}^{2}$ the negative
1023: contribution from $r\gsim r_{n}$ still takes over in the $V_{L}'(2S)$
1024: production amplitude. With increasing energy, the
1025: positive contribution to the production amplitude
1026: rises faster and gradually takes over. At some
1027: intermediate energy there is an exact cancellation
1028: of the two contributions to the production
1029: amplitude and
1030: $V_{L}'(2S)$ production cross section
1031: exhibits a minimum. The value of the minimum is finite
1032: because cancellations in the real and imaginary part of the
1033: production amplitude are different.
1034: Using the model wave functions from \cite {NNPZ97}
1035: we find such a nonmonotonic energy dependence of the
1036: $\rho_{L}'(2S)$ and $\phi_{L}'(2S)$
1037: production at $Q^{2}\approx 0.5$\,GeV$^{2}$,
1038: which is shown in Fig.~3 (bottom boxes) and Fig.~4 (middle boxes).
1039: At higher $Q^{2}>Q_{c}^{2}$ one encounters the above described
1040: undercompensation
1041: scenario and
1042: the energy dependence of $V_{L}'(2S)/V_{L}(1S)$
1043: production ratios and of $V'_{L}(2S)$ production
1044: cross sections becomes very weak.
1045:
1046: %
1047: %
1048: %*********************** SECTION 4 ***************************
1049: %
1050: %
1051: %
1052: %*********************************************
1053: \section{Anomalous diffraction slope for production of $2S$
1054: radially excited vector mesons}
1055: %*********************************************
1056:
1057:
1058: For a
1059: better understanding of anomalous properties
1060: of the $V'(2S)$ diffraction slope,
1061: the generalized factorization formula (\ref{eq:10})
1062: can be rewritten as the ratio of two matrix elements
1063: %
1064: %
1065: % ---------------------------------------------------------------------
1066: \beqn
1067: B(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V(V'),\xi,Q^{2},{\bf q}=0) =
1068: \frac{
1069: \langle V(V') |\sigma(\xi,r)B(\xi,r)|\gamma^{*}\rangle
1070: }{
1071: \langle V(V') |\sigma(\xi,r)|\gamma^{*}\rangle} =
1072: \nonumber \\
1073: \frac{
1074: \int\limits_{0}^{1} dz\int d^{2}{\bf{r}}\sigma(\xi,r)
1075: B(\xi,r)\Psi_{V(V')}^{*}({\bf{r}},z)\Psi_{\gamma^{*}}({\bf{r}},z)
1076: }{
1077: \int\limits_{0}^{1} dz\int d^{2}{\bf{r}}\sigma(\xi,r)
1078: \Psi_{V(V')}^{*}({\bf{r}},z)\Psi_{\gamma^{*}}({\bf{r}},z)} = \frac{{\cal
1079: N}}
1080: {{\cal D}}
1081: \, ,
1082: \label{eq:16}
1083: \eeqn
1084: % ---------------------------------------------------------------------
1085: %
1086: %
1087: where ${\cal N}$ and ${\cal D}$ denotes the numerator and
1088: denominator, respectively.
1089:
1090: Anomalous properties of the diffraction slope comes namely
1091: from (\ref{eq:16}).
1092: The denominator ${\cal D}$ represents the well-known production
1093: amplitude.
1094: As it was mentioned
1095: the $V(1S)$ production amplitude
1096: is dominated by contribution from
1097: dipole size $r\sim r_{S}$ (\ref{eq:1}).
1098: However,
1099: because of an approximate $\propto r^{2}$
1100: behaviour of the slope parameter
1101: the integrand of the matrix element in the numerator ${\cal N}$
1102: of Eq.~(\ref{eq:22})
1103: is dominated by the dipole size
1104: $r = r_{B}\sim 5/3r_{S}$.
1105:
1106: Let ${\cal M}_{+}$ and ${\cal M}_{-}$ be the moduli
1107: of positive and negative valued contributions to the $V'(2S)$
1108: production amplitude from the region
1109: of dipole sizes $r < r_{n}$ and $r > r_{n}$, and let
1110: $B_{+}$ and $B_{-}$ be the diffraction slopes for the
1111: corresponding contributions. Because of an approximate
1112: $\sim r^{2}$ dependence of the diffraction slope (see discussion
1113: in Sect.~2) we have a strong inequality
1114: %
1115: %
1116: %------------------------------------------------
1117: \beq
1118: B_{+} < B_{-}
1119: \label{eq:17}
1120: \eeq
1121: %------------------------------------------------
1122: %
1123: %
1124: The overall
1125: $V'(2S)$ production amplitude is
1126: ${\cal M}(2S) = {\cal M}_{+}-{\cal M}_{-}$ and the
1127: corresponding overall diffraction slope for $V'(2S)$
1128: production reads
1129: %
1130: %
1131: %------------------------------------------------
1132: \beqn
1133: B(2S) = \frac{B_{+}{\cal M}_{+} - B_{-}{\cal M}_{-}}
1134: { {\cal M}_{+}-{\cal M}_{-}}\nonumber \\
1135: =
1136: B_{+} - (B_{-} - B_{+})\frac{{\cal M}_{-}}
1137: {{\cal M}_{+}-{\cal M}_{-}} \, ,
1138: \label{eq:18}
1139: \eeqn
1140: %------------------------------------------------
1141: %
1142: %
1143: which can be rewritten in a more convenient
1144: form for the following discussion
1145: %
1146: %
1147: %------------------------------------------------
1148: \beq
1149: B(2S) - B(1S) =
1150: - (B_{-} - B_{+})\frac{{\cal M}_{-}}
1151: {{\cal M}_{+}-{\cal M}_{-}} \, ,
1152: \label{eq:19}
1153: \eeq
1154: %------------------------------------------------
1155: %
1156: %
1157: where $B(1S)\approx B_{+}$ for production of $V(1S)$
1158: vector mesons.
1159: For the diffractive production of $V'(2S)$ heavy vector
1160: mesons the production amplitude
1161: ${\cal M}(2S)$ is
1162: positive valued (undercompensation scenario)
1163: at $Q^{2}=0$ and consequently we predict
1164: from (\ref{eq:19}) a counterintuitive
1165: inequality $B(\Psi'(2S)) < B(J/\Psi(1S))$ \cite{NNPZZ98}
1166: although the r.m.s. radius of $\Psi'$ is much larger than $R_{J/\Psi}$.
1167: However, we will manifest below that this is not
1168: always true in production of $V'(2S)$ light vector mesons.
1169:
1170:
1171: %
1172: %
1173: %------------------------- FIG.5. ----------------------------
1174: %
1175: %
1176: \begin{figure}[tbh]
1177: %
1178: \special{psfile=bd-f1.ps angle=0. voffset=-365. hoffset=50.
1179: hscale=65. vscale=50.}
1180: \begin{center}
1181: \vspace{9.30cm}
1182: \parbox{13cm}
1183: {\caption[Delta]
1184: {
1185: ~- The color dipole model
1186: predictions for the $Q^{2}$ dependence of the diffraction slope $B(t=0)$
1187: for production of
1188: transversely (T)
1189: (top boxes), longitudinally (L)
1190: (middle boxes) polarized
1191: and polarization-unseparated
1192: (T) + $\epsilon$(L) (bottom boxes)
1193: $\rho'(2S)$ and $\phi'(2S)$
1194: for $\epsilon = 1$
1195: at different values of the c.m.s. energy $W$.
1196: }
1197: %-------------------
1198: \label{event5}}
1199: %-------------------
1200: \end{center}
1201: %
1202: \end{figure}
1203: %-------------------------------------------------------------
1204: %
1205: \vspace*{3mm}
1206:
1207: {\bf Undercompensation scenario}
1208:
1209: The undercompensation scenario
1210: (${\cal D} > 0$ in (\ref{eq:16}))
1211: corresponds to the
1212: production of $(T)$ polarized $\rho'(2S)$ and $\phi'(2S)$
1213: at $Q^{2}=0$ using the
1214: wave functions from Ref.~\cite{NNPZ97}.
1215: Because of $r_{B}> r_{S}$,
1216: there are two possibilities concerning the sign of
1217: ${\cal N}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:16}). \\
1218: i.)
1219: ${\cal N} < 0$; ${\cal N}$ and ${\cal D}$ have
1220: the opposite sign. Consequently, the diffraction
1221: slope in the photoproduction limit is negative
1222: valued. This pattern corresponds to diffractive
1223: photoproduction of $\rho_{T}'(2S)$ at small energy (see Figs.~5
1224: and 6 - top boxes). \\
1225: %
1226: ii.)
1227: ${\cal N} > 0$; ${\cal N}$ and ${\cal D}$ have
1228: the same sign. Consequently, the diffraction
1229: slope in the photoproduction limit is positive
1230: valued. This pattern corresponds to diffractive
1231: photoproduction of $\phi_{T}'(2S)$ (see Figs.~5 and 6 -
1232: top boxes) and the node effect is weaker
1233: in comparison with $\rho_{T}'(2S)$ photoproduction.\\
1234: %
1235: In both cases we predict from Eq.~(\ref{eq:19}) the
1236: counterintuitive inequalities
1237: $B(\rho_{T}'(2S)) < B(\rho_{T}(1S))$ and
1238: $B(\phi_{T}'(2S)) < B(\phi_{T}(1S))$,
1239: which are analogical
1240: to that for charmonium diffractive photoproduction \cite{NNPZZ98}.
1241:
1242: A decrease of the scanning radius with $Q^{2}$ leads to a very
1243: rapid decrease of the negative valued contribution to the
1244: diffraction slope
1245: coming from $r\gsim r_{n}$ and consequently
1246: leads to a steep rise of $B(V_{T}'(2S))$ with $Q^{2}$.
1247: The higher is $Q^{2}$ the weaker is the node effect and
1248: the smaller is the difference
1249: $|B(2S) - B(1S)|$.
1250: At still larger $Q^{2}$ and
1251: at fixed energy $W$
1252: the slope parameter $B(V_{T}'(2S))$
1253: exhibits a broad maximum
1254: at some value of $Q_{T}^{2}\in
1255: (0.5-2.0)$\,GeV$^{2}$.
1256: At very large $Q^{2}\gg m_{V}^{2}$ when the node effect becomes
1257: negligible, $B(2S)\sim B(1S)$ and
1258: $B(V_{T}'(2S))$ decreases monotonously with $Q^{2}$
1259: following the $Q^{2}$ dependence
1260: of $B(V_{L,T}(1S))$.
1261: The above described pattern of nonmonotonic $Q^{2}$ dependence
1262: of the diffraction slope is
1263: depicted in Fig.~5 (bottom boxes) for both the
1264: $\rho_{T}'(2S)$ and $\phi_{T}'(2S)$ production.
1265:
1266: \vspace*{3mm}
1267:
1268: {\bf Overcompensation scenario}
1269:
1270: The overcompensation scenario
1271: (${\cal D} < 0$ in (\ref{eq:16})),
1272: corresponds to the
1273: production of $(L)$ polarized $\rho'(2S)$ and $\phi'(2S)$
1274: at $Q^{2}=0$ using the
1275: wave functions from Ref.~\cite{NNPZ97}.
1276: Because of $r_{B} > r_{S}$,
1277: ${\cal N} < 0$ and has the same sign as ${\cal D}$.
1278: Consequently, the diffraction slope in the
1279: photoproduction limit is positive valued as it can be
1280: expected also from the
1281: undercompensation
1282: regime described above. The sign of the diffraction slope $B(2S)$
1283: at $Q^{2}=0$ can not distinguish between the overcompensation
1284: and undercompensation scenarios.
1285: However, because of ${\cal M}(2S) < 0$ the difference
1286: $B(2S) - B(1S)$ is positive valued (see Eq.~(\ref{eq:19}).
1287: As the result we predict the expected inequalities
1288: $B(\rho_{L}(1S)) < B(\rho_{L}'(2S))$ and
1289: $B(\phi_{L}(1S)) < B(\phi_{L}'(2S))$, what is a new result
1290: in comparison with the color dipole predictions for heavy
1291: vector mesons presented in the paper \cite{NNPZZ98}.
1292:
1293: With the decrease of the scanning radius with $Q^{2}$
1294: there is a rapid decrease of the negative contributions
1295: to ${\cal N}$ and ${\cal D}$
1296: coming from $r\gsim r_{n}$.
1297: For some $Q^{2}\sim Q'^{2}_{L}\in (0.5-1.5)$\,GeV$^{2}$
1298: one encounters the exact node effect firstly for the denominator
1299: ${\cal D}$ and $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ has a
1300: peak for both the $\rho_{L}'(2S)$ and
1301: $\phi_{L}'(2S)$ production.
1302: The value of $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ corresponding to
1303: this exact node effect will be finite due to a different node effect
1304: for the real and imaginary part of the production amplitude.
1305: The onset of the node effect causes also the rapid
1306: continuous transition of $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ from positive to
1307: negative values
1308: when the matrix element ${\cal D}$ passes from the
1309: overcompensation to undercompensation regime.
1310: Consequently, for $Q^{2} > Q'^{2}_{L}$,
1311: ${\cal D} > 0$, ${\cal N}$ is kept to be negative valued
1312: and $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ starts to
1313: rise from its minimal negative value (see Fig.~5 - middle
1314: boxes).
1315: At still larger $Q^{2}$ the
1316: following pattern of the $Q^{2}$ behaviour of
1317: $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ is analogical to that for
1318: $Q^{2}$ dependence of $B(V_{T}'(2S))$.
1319: For the production of polarization unseparated $V'(2S)$,
1320: the anomalous properties of $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ are essentially
1321: invisible and the corresponding slope parameter
1322: $B(V'(2S))$ has an analogical $Q^{2}$ dependence as $B(V_{T}'(2S))$
1323: and is shown in Fig.~5 (bottom boxes).
1324: Here we can not insist on the precise value of
1325: $Q'^{2}_{L}$ which is again a subject of the soft-hard cancellations.
1326: We would like only to emphasize that the exact node effect
1327: for $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ is at a finite $Q'^{2}_{L}$.
1328:
1329: To conclude
1330: the
1331: $Q^{2}$ dependence of $B(2S)$,
1332: the undercompensation scenario
1333: is characterized by a broad maximum
1334: at $Q^{2}\sim Q^{2}_{T}$ and can
1335: be tested experimentally at HERA measuring the virtual
1336: photoproduction of the $\rho'(2S)$ and $\phi'(2S)$ at
1337: $Q^{2}\in (0-10)$\, GeV$^{2}$ and at different values of energy.
1338: However, the overcompensation scenario
1339: is characterized by a sharp peak followed by a very rapid transition of
1340: the diffraction slope from positive to negative values
1341: at $Q^{2}\sim Q'^{2}_{L}$ and then by a broad maximum at
1342: $Q^{2}\sim Q^{2}_{L}$ and
1343: can be also investigated at HERA separating $(L)$ polarized
1344: $\rho_{L}'(2S)$ and $\phi_{L}'(2S)$ at moderate
1345: $Q^{2}\in (0.1-5.0)$\,GeV$^{2}$.
1346:
1347: %
1348: %------------------------- FIG.6. ----------------------------
1349: %
1350: %
1351: \begin{figure}[tbh]
1352: %
1353: \special{psfile=bd-f2.ps angle=0. voffset=-365. hoffset=50.
1354: hscale=65. vscale=50.}
1355: \begin{center}
1356: \vspace{9.5cm}
1357: \parbox{13cm}
1358: {\caption[Delta]
1359: {
1360: ~- The color dipole model
1361: predictions for the $W$ dependence of the diffraction slope $B(t=0)$
1362: for production of
1363: transversely (T)
1364: (top boxes), longitudinally (L)
1365: (middle boxes) polarized
1366: and polarization-unseparated
1367: (T) + $\epsilon$(L) (bottom boxes)
1368: $\rho'(2S)$ and $\phi'(2S)$
1369: for $\epsilon = 1$
1370: at different values of $Q^2$.
1371: }
1372: %-------------------
1373: \label{event6}}
1374: %-------------------
1375: \end{center}
1376: %
1377: \end{figure}
1378: %-------------------------------------------------------------
1379:
1380: The energy dependence of $B(V'(2S))$
1381: at different $Q^{2}$ is shown
1382: in Fig.~6 and has its own peculiarities.
1383: Let us start with $B(V_{T}'(2S))$ at $Q^{2}=0$
1384: when the production amplitude is in the undercompensation regime,
1385: ${\cal D} > 0$.
1386: Fig.~6 demonstrates (top boxes) steeper rise with energy
1387: of the diffraction slope at lower $Q^{2}$ and confirms
1388: the expectation coming from the gBFKL dynamics that
1389: the energy dependence of $B_{T}'(2S)$
1390: is given mainly by the effective Regge slope $\alpha'$
1391: (see Eqn.~(\ref{eq:12}) and (\ref{eq:15}),
1392: which decreases with $Q^{2}$.
1393: %
1394:
1395: The successful separation of $(L)$ polarized
1396: $V_{L}'(2S)$ mesons at HERA offers an unique possibility
1397: to study an anomalous energy dependence of
1398: the diffraction slope in the overcompensation scenario.
1399: At $Q^{2}=0$
1400: both the ${\cal N}$ and ${\cal D}$ of Eq.~(\ref{eq:16})
1401: are negative valued.
1402: At moderate energy and $Q^{2}$ close but smaller than
1403: $Q'^{2}_{L}$, the negative valued contribution
1404: coming from $r\gsim r_{n}$ still takes over in ${\cal D}$
1405: (${\cal N} < 0$ as well due to $r_{B}> r_{S}$).
1406: Because of a steeper rise with energy of
1407: the positive contribution to the $V'(2S)$ production amplitude
1408: coming from $r\lsim r_{n}$
1409: than the negative contribution coming from
1410: $r\gsim r_{n}$, we find an exact cancellation
1411: of these two contributions to ${\cal D}$ and a maximum
1412: of the diffraction slope $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ at some intermediate energy
1413: followed by its rapid continuous transition
1414: from the positive to negative values,
1415: when ${\cal D}$ passes
1416: from the overcompensation to the undercompensation regime.
1417: Different node effect for the real and imaginary part of
1418: the production amplitude provides such a continuous transition.
1419: At larger energies
1420: ${\cal D} > 0$ (undercompensation regime) and consequently
1421: $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ is negative valued and starts to rise
1422: from its minimal negative value.
1423: Such a situation is depicted in Fig.~6 (middle boxes), where we
1424: predict with the wave functions from Ref.~\cite{NNPZ97}
1425: such a nonmonotonic energy behaviour
1426: of $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ for both $\rho'(2S)$
1427: and $\phi'(2S)$ production at $Q^{2}\lsim Q'^{2}_{L}\in (0.5-1.5)$\,
1428: GeV$^{2}$.
1429: The position of the maximum $W_{t}$
1430: and the transition from the positive to negative
1431: values of $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ depends on $Q^{2}$
1432: and can be measured at HERA.
1433: At higher $Q^{2}$ and smaller scanning radii,
1434: the further pattern of the energy behaviour for
1435: $B(V_{L}'(2S)$ is analogical to that
1436: for $B(V_{T}'(2S))$.
1437:
1438: If $(T)$ and $(L)$
1439: polarized $V_{T}'(2S)$ and $V_{L}'(2S)$ mesons will be
1440: separated experimentally there is a chance for
1441: experimental determination
1442: of a concrete scenario in $(T)$ and $(L)$
1443: polarized $V'(2S)$ production amplitude.
1444: The simplest test can be realized in the photoproduction limit
1445: ($Q^{2}=0$) for a broad energy range.
1446: If the data will report the
1447: counterintuitive inequality $B(2S) < B(1S)$
1448: ($B(2S)$ can be also negative valued) then
1449: $V'(2S)$ production amplitude is in the undercompensation
1450: regime (positive valued). In the opposite case when
1451: the expected inequality $B(2S) > B(1S)$ will be obtained from the data then
1452: $V'(2S)$ production amplitude is in the overcompensation
1453: regime (negative valued).
1454: For the production of $(L)$ polarized vector mesons
1455: the values of $Q^{2}$
1456: should be high enough to have the data with a reasonable
1457: statistics however, must not be very large in order
1458: to have a considerably strong node effect. We propose the range
1459: of $Q^{2}\in (0.5-5.0)$\,GeV$^{2}$ for exploratory study
1460: of the overcompensation scenario at HERA.
1461:
1462: %***************************************
1463: \section{Anomalous $t$ dependence of the differential cross section
1464: for production of $2S$ radially excited vector mesons}
1465: %***************************************
1466:
1467: We discuss now the possible
1468: peculiarities in $t$ dependent differential cross
1469: section $d\sigma/dt$ for $V'(2S)$ production.
1470: We would like to emphasize again
1471: that we do not insist on
1472: the precise form of the $t$ dependence of $d\sigma/dt$,
1473: the main emphasis is on the likely pattern
1474: of the $t$ dependence coming from the node effect.
1475: The differential cross section is calculated
1476: using the expressions (\ref{eq:4}) and (\ref{eq:5}) for
1477: $(T)$ and $(L)$ production amplitudes in conjunction
1478: with Eqs.~(\ref{eq:7}), (\ref{eq:8}), (\ref{eq:12}) and (\ref{eq:15}).
1479: Because of an approximate $\propto r^{2}$ behaviour of
1480: the geometrical contribution to the diffraction slope (see
1481: discussion in Sect.~2),
1482: the large size negative contribution to the production
1483: amplitude
1484: from the region $r>r_{n}$
1485: corresponds to larger value of the diffraction slope than the
1486: small size contribution from the region $r<r_{n}$.
1487: It means that
1488: the negative contribution to the $V'(2S)$ production amplitude
1489: has a steeper $t$ dependence than the positive contribution.
1490: Let $t$-dependent production amplitude be
1491: %
1492: %
1493: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1494: \beq
1495: {\cal M}(t) = c_{+}\exp(-\frac{1}{2}B_{+}t)-c_{-}\exp(-\frac{1}{2}
1496: B_{-}t)
1497: \label{eq:20}\, ,
1498: \eeq
1499: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1500: %
1501: %
1502: where $c_{+}$ and $c_{-}$ are the contributions to the amplitude
1503: from the region below and above the node position
1504: with the corresponding effective diffraction slopes $B_{+}$ and $B_{-}$,
1505: respectively ($B_{+} < B_{-}$).
1506: Inequality $c_{+} > c_{-}$ means the
1507: undercompensation
1508: whereas $c_{+} < c_{-}$ the overcompensation regime.
1509: The destructive interference of these two contributions
1510: results in a decrease of the effective diffraction slope
1511: for $V'(2S)$
1512: meson production towards small $t$ in contrary to the familiar increase
1513: for the $V(1S)$ meson production.
1514: Such a situation is shown in Fig.~7, where we present the model
1515: predictions for the differential cross section
1516: $d\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V(V'))/dt$
1517: for production of $V(1S)$ and $V'(2S)$ mesons at
1518: different c.m.s. energies $W$ and at $Q^{2}=0$.
1519:
1520: %
1521: %
1522: %------------------------- FIG.7. ----------------------------
1523: %
1524: %
1525: \begin{figure}[tbh]
1526: %
1527: \special{psfile=td-f1.ps angle=0. voffset=-320. hoffset=50.
1528: hscale=65. vscale=50.}
1529: \begin{center}
1530: \vspace{6.3cm}
1531: \parbox{13cm}
1532: {\caption[Delta]
1533: {
1534: ~- The color dipole model
1535: predictions for the differential cross sections
1536: $d\sigma(\gamma^* \rightarrow V(V'))/dt$
1537: for the real photoproduction ($Q^2=0$)
1538: of the $\rho^{0}, \rho'(2S), \phi^{0}$ and $\phi'(2S)$
1539: at different values of the c.m.s. energy
1540: $W$.
1541: }
1542: %-------------------
1543: \label{event7}}
1544: %-------------------
1545: \end{center}
1546: %
1547: \end{figure}
1548: %-------------------------------------------------------------
1549: %
1550:
1551: Real photoproduction measures the purely transverse
1552: cross section.
1553: As was already mentioned,
1554: $V'(2S)$ production amplitude is in undercompensation
1555: regime (${\cal D}> 0$).
1556: However,
1557: because of $r_{B} > r_{S}$,
1558: the numerator ${\cal N}< 0$
1559: at $W\lsim 150$\,GeV for $\rho'(2S)$ production
1560: and at $W\lsim 30$\,GeV for $\phi'(2S)$ production.
1561: As the result, the diffraction
1562: slope is negative valued at $Q^{2}=0$.
1563: At $t > 0$ the node effect becomes weaker.
1564: The higher is $t$ the weaker is the node effect as a consequence
1565: of the destructive interference (\ref{eq:20}) described above.
1566: Consequently,
1567: $d\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V'(2S))/dt$ firstly rises
1568: with $t$, flattens off at $t\in (0.0-0.2)$\,GeV$^{2}$
1569: having a broad maximum.
1570: At large $t$, the node effect is weak
1571: and $d\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V'(2S))/dt$
1572: decreases with $t$ monotonously as
1573: for $V(1S)$ production.
1574: The position of the maximum can be roughly evaluated
1575: from (\ref{eq:20})
1576: %
1577: %
1578: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1579: \beq
1580: t_{max} \sim \frac{1}{2(B_{-}-B_{+})}log\Biggl [\frac{c_{-}^{2}}{c_{+}^{2}}
1581: \frac{B_{-}^{2}}{B_{+}^{2}}\Biggr ]
1582: \, ,
1583: \label{eq:21}
1584: \eeq
1585: %------------------------------------------------------------------------
1586: %
1587: %
1588: with the supplementary condition
1589: %
1590: %
1591: %------------------------------------------------------------------------
1592: \beq
1593: \frac{c_{-}}{c_{+}} > \frac{B_{+}}{B_{-}}
1594: \label{eq:22}
1595: \eeq
1596: %------------------------------------------------------------------------
1597: %
1598: %
1599: If the condition (\ref{eq:22}) is not fulfilled
1600: $d\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V'(2S))/dt$
1601: has no maximum and exhibits a standard
1602: monotonous $t$- behaviour.
1603: The predicted nonmonotonic $t$- behaviour of $d\sigma/dt$
1604: for $\rho'(2S)$ and $\phi'(2S)$ production in the
1605: photoproduction limit is strikingly different
1606: especially at smaller energies from
1607: the familiar decrease with $t$ of $d\sigma(\gamma\rightarrow
1608: \rho^{0}(1S))/dt$ and $d\sigma(\gamma\rightarrow \phi^{0}(1S))/dt$
1609: (see Fig.~7).
1610:
1611: At larger energies, $W\gsim 150$\,GeV for the
1612: $\rho'(2S)$ photoproduction and
1613: $W\gsim 30$\,GeV for
1614: $\phi'(2S)$ photoproduction, the node effect
1615: becomes weaker the diffraction slope is positive valued
1616: (both ${\cal N}> 0$ and ${\cal D}> 0$)
1617: and
1618: the nonmonotonic $t$ dependence of the differential cross
1619: section is changed for the monotonic one but still the
1620: effective diffraction slope decreases slightly towards small $t$
1621: (see Fig.~7).
1622:
1623: %
1624: %
1625: %------------------------- FIG.8. ----------------------------
1626: %
1627: %
1628: \begin{figure}[tbh]
1629: %
1630: \special{psfile=td-f2.ps angle=0. voffset=-320. hoffset=50.
1631: hscale=65. vscale=50.}
1632: \begin{center}
1633: \vspace{9.5cm}
1634: \parbox{13cm}
1635: {\caption[Delta]
1636: {
1637: ~- The color dipole model
1638: predictions for the differential cross sections
1639: $d\sigma_{L,T}(\gamma^* \rightarrow V'(2S))/dt$ for
1640: transversely (T)
1641: (top boxes) and longitudinally (L)
1642: (middle boxes) polarized radially excited
1643: $\rho'(2S)$, $\phi'(2S)$
1644: and for the polarization-unseparated
1645: $d\sigma(\gamma^* \rightarrow V')/dt=
1646: d\sigma_{T}(\gamma^* \rightarrow V'(2S))/dt+\epsilon
1647: d\sigma_{L}(\gamma^* \rightarrow V'(2S))/dt$ for
1648: $\epsilon = 1$ (bottom boxes)
1649: at $Q^{2}=0.5$\,GeV$^{2}$ and different values of the c.m.s. energy
1650: $W$.
1651: }
1652: %-------------------
1653: \label{event8}}
1654: %-------------------
1655: \end{center}
1656: %
1657: \end{figure}
1658: %-------------------------------------------------------------
1659: %
1660:
1661: Because of a possible overcompensation scenario
1662: for $\rho'_{L}(2S)$ and
1663: $\phi'_{L}(2S)$ mesons
1664: at small $Q^{2}$ (see also previous sections),
1665: we present in Fig.~8 the model predictions for
1666: $d\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V'(2S))/dt$
1667: at different energies $W$
1668: and at fixed $Q^{2}= 0.5$\,GeV$^{2}$ for the production of
1669: $(T)$, $(L)$ polarized and polarization unseparated $\rho'(2S)$ and
1670: $\phi'(2S)$ mesons.
1671: As it was mentioned above, at $Q^{2}= 0.5$\,GeV$^{2}$
1672: the production amplitude for $\rho_{L}'(2S)$ and $\phi_{L}'(2S)$ mesons
1673: is still in overcompensation regime ${\cal D}< 0$
1674: (${\cal N}< 0$ as well) and the corresponding
1675: diffraction slope $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ is positive valued at small energies
1676: $W\lsim 20$\,GeV.
1677: It results in a very spectacular pattern of anomalous $t$ dependence for
1678: $d\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V_{L}'(2S))/dt$
1679: shown in Fig.~8 (middle boxes).
1680: With rising $t$ due to above described destructive
1681: interference
1682: of two contributions to the production amplitude
1683: (see (\ref{eq:20})),
1684: one encounters the exact node effect
1685: at some $t\sim t_{min}$.
1686: Consequently, $d\sigma/dt$ firstly falls down
1687: rapidly with $t$
1688: having a minimum at $t\sim t_{min}$.
1689: At still larger $t$
1690: when the overcompensation scenario of $t$- dependent
1691: production amplitude is changed for the undercompensation one
1692: and the slope parameter becomes to be negative valued,
1693: $d\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V_{L}'(2S))/dt$ starts to rise with $t$
1694: and further pattern of $t$- behaviour is analogical to that
1695: for $V_{T}'(2S)$ production (see Fig.~7).
1696:
1697: The position of the minimum $t_{min}$
1698: is model dependent and can be roughly estimated from (\ref{eq:20})
1699: %
1700: %
1701: %-------------------------------------------------------------------
1702: \beq
1703: t_{min} \sim \frac{1}{2(B_{-}-B_{+})}log\Biggl [\frac{c_{-}^{2}}{c_{+}^{2}}
1704: \Biggr ]\, .
1705: \label{eq:23}
1706: \eeq
1707: %------------------------------------------------------------------------
1708: %
1709: %
1710:
1711: The gBFKL model predictions give
1712: $t_{min}\sim 0.03$\,GeV$^{2}$ for $\rho_{L}'(2S)$ production
1713: and
1714: $t_{min}\sim 0.05$\,GeV$^{2}$ for $\phi_{L}'(2S)$ production
1715: at $Q^{2} = 0.5$\,GeV$^{2}$ and at $W= 5$\,GeV.
1716: However, we can not exclude a possibility that
1717: this minimum will take a place at other values of $t$.
1718: At $Q^{2} < 0.5$\,GeV$^{2}$, $t_{min}$ will be
1719: located at larger values of $t$.
1720: At higher energy, the position of $t_{min}$ is shifted
1721: to a smaller value of $t$ unless the exact
1722: node effect is reached at $t=0$.
1723: At still larger energy, when the
1724: $V'_{L}(2S)$ production amplitude is in undercompensation regime,
1725: this minimum disappears and
1726: we predict the pattern of $t$- behaviour for
1727: $d\sigma(\gamma^{*}\rightarrow V_{L}'(2S))/dt$
1728: analogical to that for
1729: $d\sigma(\gamma\rightarrow V_{T}'(2S))/dt$
1730: in the photoproduction limit depicted in Fig.~7.
1731: These predicted anomalies can be tested at HERA measuring
1732: the diffractive electroproduction of $V'(2S)$
1733: light vector mesons in separate polarizations $(T)$ and $(L)$.
1734:
1735: %********************
1736: \section{Conclusions}
1737: %********************
1738:
1739: We study the
1740: diffractive photo- and electroproduction
1741: of radially excited $V'(2S)$
1742: vector mesons within the color dipole gBFKL dynamics.
1743: We present a short review of possible anomalies,
1744: which can be presently observed at HERA experiments.
1745: The predicted anomalies are connected with the
1746: node position in $V'(2S)$ radial wave function.
1747:
1748: Firstly, we present a
1749: rich pattern of anomalous $Q^{2}$
1750: and energy dependence of the production cross section.
1751: As a consequence of the node effect especially for
1752: light vector mesons ($\rho'(2S), \phi'(2S)$)
1753: we predict a very strong suppression of the
1754: $V'(2S)/V(1S)$ production ratio in the real photoproduction limit of
1755: very small $Q^{2}$.
1756: For the longitudinally polarized $V'(2S)$
1757: mesons we find a plausible overcompensation scenario leading to a sharp
1758: dip of the longitudinal cross section
1759: $\sigma_{L}(2S)$ at some finite $Q^{2}
1760: =Q_{c}^{2}\sim 0.5$\,GeV$^{2}$. The position $Q_{c}^{2}$ of this dip
1761: depends on the energy and leads to a nonmonotonic energy
1762: dependence of $\sigma_{L}(2S)$ at fixed $Q^{2}$.
1763: At larger $Q^{2}$ and smaller scanning radius
1764: we predict a steep rise of the $V'(2S)/V(1S)$ cross section ratio.
1765: The flattening of this $2S/1S$ ratio at large $Q^{2}$ is
1766: a non-negotiable prediction from the color dipole dynamics.
1767:
1768: Further predictions are related to the
1769: anomalous pattern of $Q^{2}$ and energy behaviour of the
1770: diffraction slope for the production of $V'(2S)$
1771: vector mesons.
1772: At moderate energies,
1773: we find a nonmonotonic $Q^{2}$ dependence of the slope
1774: parameter which can be tested at HERA in the range
1775: of $Q^{2}\in (0-10)$\,GeV$^{2}$.
1776: For the production of $(L)$ polarized $V'(2S)$
1777: as a consequence of the
1778: overcompensation scenario we find a sharp peak followed
1779: immediately by
1780: a very rapid transition of the slope parameter
1781: from positive to negative values
1782: at $Q^{2}\sim Q'^{2}_{L}\in (0.5-1.5)$\,GeV$^{2}$
1783: The position of this rapid transition $Q'^{2}_{L}$
1784: is energy dependent and leads
1785: to a nonmonotonic energy dependence of $B(V_{L}'(2S))$ at fixed
1786: $Q^{2}$.
1787: At $Q^{2}=0$ when
1788: the node effect is strong, for the undercompensation
1789: scenario we predict a counterintuitive
1790: inequality $B(V'(2S)) < B(V(1S))$.
1791: However, for overcompensation
1792: scenario we predict the expected standard inequality
1793: $B(V'(2S)) > B(V(1S))$.
1794: This is a very crucial point of a possible experimental
1795: determination of a concrete scenario
1796: extracting from the data at HERA the $B(V'(2S))$ diffraction slope
1797: in the photoproduction limit.
1798:
1799: The last class of predictions concerns to an
1800: anomalous $t$ dependence of the $V'(2S)$
1801: differential cross section.
1802: The origin is in
1803: destructive interference of the
1804: large distance negative contribution to the
1805: production amplitude from the region
1806: above the node position with a steeper
1807: $t$- dependence and the
1808: small distance positive contribution to the
1809: production amplitude from the region
1810: below the node position with a weaker
1811: $t$- dependence.
1812: As the result,
1813: we predict at $Q^{2}=0$
1814: a nonmonotonic $t$ dependence of
1815: $d\sigma(\gamma\rightarrow V_{T}'(2S))/dt$
1816: and a decreasing diffraction slope for $V_{T}'(2S)$ mesons
1817: towards small values of $t$
1818: in contrary with the familiar increase of $B(V(1S))$
1819: for $V(1S)$ vector mesons.
1820: The differential cross section
1821: firstly rises
1822: with $t$ having a broad maximum.
1823: At larger $t$ when the node effect is still
1824: weaker, $d\sigma(\gamma\rightarrow V_{T}'(2S))/dt$ has the standard
1825: monotonic $t$- behaviour as for production of $V(1S)$
1826: vector mesons.
1827: For production of $(L)$ polarized $V_{L}'(2S)$ mesons,
1828: there is overcompensation at $t=0$ leading to
1829: a dip (minimum) of the differential cross section at $t\sim t_{min}$.
1830: The position of $t_{min}$ is
1831: energy dependent and is the result of the model dependent
1832: soft-hard cancellations.
1833:
1834: To conclude, if the data will exhibit
1835: a dip (minimum) in energy ($Q^{2}$) dependence of the
1836: $V'(2S)$ production cross section, $V'(2S)/V(1S)$ cross
1837: section ratio, diffraction slope and in $t$ dependence
1838: of the differential cross section $d\sigma/dt$ then
1839: the corresponding $V'(2S)$ production amplitude
1840: is in the overcompensation regime.
1841: Otherwise the $V'(2S)$ production amplitude is
1842: in the undercompensation regime.
1843:
1844:
1845:
1846: %
1847: %
1848: % --------------------------- REFERENCES -------------------------------
1849: %
1850: %
1851: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1852: \hsize 130mm
1853:
1854: \bibitem{DL} %% - 1
1855: A.Donnachie and P.V.Landshoff, {\sl Phys. Lett.} {\bf B185}
1856: (1987) 403; \\
1857: J.R.Cuddell, {\sl Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B336} (1990) 1.
1858:
1859: \bibitem{KZ91} %%% - 2
1860: B.Z.Kopeliovich and B.G.Zakharov, {\sl Phys. Rev.} {\bf D44}
1861: (1991) 3466.
1862:
1863: \bibitem{Ryskin} %%% - 3
1864: M.G.Ryskin, {\sl Z. Phys.} {\bf C57} (1993) 89.
1865:
1866: \bibitem{KNNZ93} %%% - 4
1867: B.Z.Kopeliovich, J.Nemchik, N.N.Nikolaev and B.G.Zakharov,
1868: {\sl Phys. Lett.} {\bf B309} (1993) 179.
1869:
1870: \bibitem{KNNZ94} %%% - 5
1871: B.Z.Kopeliovich, J.Nemchik, N.N.Nikolaev and B.G.Zakharov,
1872: {\sl Phys. Lett.} {\bf B324} (1994) 469.
1873:
1874: \bibitem{NNZscan} %%% - 6
1875: J.Nemchik, N.N.Nikolaev and B.G.Zakharov,
1876: {\sl Phys. Lett.} {\bf B341} (1994) 228.
1877:
1878: \bibitem{Brodsky} %%% - 7
1879: S.J.Brodsky et al., {\sl Phys. Rev.} {\bf D50} (1994) 3134.
1880:
1881: \bibitem{Forshaw} %%% - 8
1882: J.R.Forshaw and M.G.Ryskin, {\sl Z. Phys.} {\bf C} (1995)
1883: to be published.
1884:
1885: \bibitem{GLM} %%% - 9
1886: E.Gotsman, E.M.Levin and U.Maor,
1887: {\sl Nucl. Phys.}
1888: {\bf B464} (1996) 251.
1889:
1890: \bibitem{Kuraev} %%% - 10
1891: E.A.Kuraev, L.N.Lipatov and S.V.Fadin,
1892: {\sl Sov. Phys. JETP} {\bf 44} (1976) 443; {\bf 45} (1977) 199.
1893:
1894: \bibitem{Balitsky} %%% - 11
1895: Yu.Yu.Balitsky and L.N.Lipatov,
1896: {\sl Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.} {\bf 28} (1978) 822.
1897:
1898: \bibitem{Lipatov} %%% - 12
1899: L.N.Lipatov,
1900: {\sl Sov. Phys. JETP} {\bf 63} (1986) 904; \\
1901: L.N.Lipatov, in:{\sl Perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics},
1902: ed. by A.H.Mueller, World Scientific (1989).
1903:
1904: \bibitem{NZ94} %%% -13
1905: N.Nikolaev and B.G.Zakharov, {\sl JETP} {\bf 78} (1994) 598;
1906: {\sl Z. Phys.} {\bf C64} (1994)631.
1907:
1908: \bibitem{NZZ94} %%% -14
1909: N.N.Nikolaev, B.G.Zakharov and V.R.Zoller,
1910: {\sl JETP Letters} {\bf 59} (1994) 6;
1911: {\sl JETP } {\bf 78} (1994) 866; {\sl Phys. Lett.} {\bf B328}
1912: (1994) 486.
1913:
1914: \bibitem{NNPZ97} %%% - 15
1915: J.Nemchik, N.N.Nikolaev, E.Predazzi and B.G.Zakharov,
1916: {\sl Z. Phys} {\bf C75} (1997) 71.
1917:
1918: \bibitem{NNPZZ98} %%% - 16
1919: J.Nemchik, N.N.Nikolaev, E.Predazzi, B.G.Zakharov and V.R.Zoller,
1920: {\sl JETP} {\bf 86} (1998) 1054.
1921:
1922: \bibitem{NNN92} %%% - 17
1923: N.N.Nikolaev, {\sl Comments on Nucl. Part. Phys.} {\bf 21}
1924: (1992) 41.
1925:
1926: \bibitem{NNZanom} %%% - 18
1927: J.Nemchik, N.N.Nikolaev and B.G.Zakharov,
1928: {\sl Phys. Lett.} {\bf B339} (1994) 194.
1929:
1930: \bibitem{NZZslope} %%% - 19
1931: N.N.Nikolaev, B.G.Zakharov and V.R.Zoller,
1932: {\sl Phys. Lett.}
1933: {\bf B366} (1996) 337
1934:
1935: \bibitem{NZZspectrum} %%% - 20
1936: N.N.Nikolaev, B.G.Zakharov and V.R.Zoller,
1937: {\sl JETP Lett.} {\bf 60} (1994) 694.
1938:
1939: \bibitem{Ntd00} %%% - 21
1940: J.Nemchik,
1941: {\sl Anomalous $t$- dependence in diffractive
1942: electroproduction of 2S radially excited light vector
1943: mesons at HERA} {\bf hep-ph-0003244},
1944: submitted to
1945: {\sl Eur. J. Phys.} {\bf C}
1946:
1947: \bibitem{Nbd00} %%% - 22
1948: J.Nemchik,
1949: {\sl The wave function of 2S
1950: radially excited vector
1951: mesons from data for diffraction slope} {\bf hep-ph-0003245},
1952: submitted to
1953: {\sl Phys. Rev.} {\bf D}
1954:
1955: \bibitem{ks70} %%% - 23
1956: J.B.Kogut and D.E.Soper,
1957: {\sl Phys. Rev.} {\bf D1} (1970) 2901.
1958:
1959: \bibitem{NZ91} %%% - 24
1960: N.N.~Nikolaev and B.G.~Zakharov, {\it Z. Phys.} {\bf C49} (1991) 607;
1961: {\it Z. Phys.} {\bf C53} (1992) 331.
1962:
1963: \bibitem{GribMig} %%% - 25
1964: V.N.Gribov and A.A.Migdal,
1965: {\sl Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.} {\bf 8} (1969) 703.
1966:
1967: \bibitem{NZHera} %%% - 26
1968: N.N.Nikolaev and B.G.Zakharov,
1969: {\sl Phys. Lett. }{\bf B327} (1994) 149.
1970:
1971: \bibitem{NNPZdipole} %%% - 27
1972: J.Nemchik, N.N.Nikolaev, E.Predazzi and B.G.Zakharov,
1973: {\sl Phys. Lett.} {\bf B374} (1996) 199.
1974:
1975: \bibitem{Schiz} %%% - 28
1976: A.Schiz et al.,
1977: {\sl Phys. Rev.} {\bf D24} (1981) 26.\\
1978: J.P.Burq et al.,
1979: {\sl Phys. Lett.} {\bf B109} (1982) 111.
1980:
1981: \bibitem{Nbsys00} %%% - 29
1982: J.Nemchik,
1983: {\sl Color dipole systematics of the diffraction slope
1984: in diffractive photo- and electroproduction of vector mesons}
1985: {\bf hep-ph-0008161} (2000), submitted to {\sl Phys. Lett.} {\bf B}
1986:
1987: \bibitem{BZNFphi} %%% - 30
1988: O.Benhar, B.G.Zakharov, N.N.Nikolaev et al.,
1989: {\sl Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 74} (1995) 3565; \\
1990: O.Benhar, S.Fantoni, N.N.Nikolaev et al.,
1991: {\sl Zh. Exp. Teor. Fiz.} {\bf 111} (1997) 769.
1992:
1993: \bibitem{SP1} %%% - 31
1994: P.S\" oding,
1995: {\sl Phys. Lett.} {\bf 19} (1966) 702.
1996:
1997: \bibitem{SP2} %%% - 32
1998: J.Pumplin,
1999: {\sl Phys. Rev.} {\bf D2} (1970) 1859.
2000:
2001: \bibitem{Potential} %%% - 33
2002: W.Buchm\"uller, S.-H.H.Tye, {\sl Phys. Rev.} {\bf D24} (1981) 132.
2003:
2004:
2005: %
2006: %
2007: \end{thebibliography}
2008: %
2009: %
2010: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------
2011: %
2012: %
2013:
2014: \end{document}
2015:
2016: