1: %version(11.01.2001)
2: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
3: %\usepackage{epsf}
4: \usepackage{psfig}
5: \textwidth 16cm \textheight 22cm \oddsidemargin 1mm
6: \topmargin=-1cm
7:
8: \begin{document}
9: \begin{center}
10: %\begin{frontmatter}
11: {\Large {\bf Deuteron photodisintegration within the Quark-Gluon
12: Strings Model and QCD motivated nonlinear Regge
13: trajectories}}\footnote{Supported by DFG and RFFI.}
14: \end{center}
15: \vspace{2cm}
16: \begin{center}
17: V.Yu.~Grishina$^a$, L.A.~Kondratyuk$^b$, W.~Cassing $^c$,
18: A.B.~Kaidalov$^b$, E.~ De~Sanctis$^d$ and P.~Rossi $^d$ \\
19: \vspace{1cm}
20: $^a${\it Institute for Nuclear Research, 60th October
21: Anniversary
22: Prospect 7A, 117312 Moscow, Russia}\\
23: $^b${\it Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, B.\
24: Cheremushkinskaya 25, 117259 Moscow, Russia}\\
25: $^c${\it Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of
26: Giessen, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 16, D-35392 Giessen, Germany}\\
27: $^d${\it Frascati National Laboratories, INFN, CP 13, via E.
28: Fermi, 40; I-00044, Frascati, Italy}\\
29:
30: \end{center}
31: \vspace{1cm}
32:
33:
34: \begin{abstract}
35: We investigate deuteron two-body photodisintegration within the
36: framework of the Quark-Gluon Strings Model with nonlinear baryon
37: Regge trajectories. Special attention is paid to the use of QCD
38: motivated Regge trajectories of the logarithmic and square-root
39: form which have been suggested recently by Brisudov\'{a},
40: Burakovsky and Goldman. We find that the recent experimental data
41: from TJNAF in the few GeV region can reasonably be described by
42: the model. Angular distributions at different $\gamma$-energies
43: are presented and the effect of a forward-backward asymmetry is
44: discussed. Predictions for the energy dependence of $d\sigma/dt$
45: at higher energies and different $\Theta_{cm}$ are presented, too.
46: \vspace{1cm}
47:
48: {\it PACS}: 12.40.Nn; 12.40.Vv; 13.40.-f; 25.20.-x
49: %\begin{keyword}
50:
51: {\it Keywords:} Regge theory, duality; Vector-meson dominance;
52: Electromagnetic processes and properties; Photonuclear reactions
53: %\end{keyword}
54: \end{abstract}
55:
56: \newpage
57: \section{Introduction}
58: \label{sec:qgsm}
59:
60: Recent experiments on high energy two-body photodisintegration of
61: the deuteron \cite{Holt}-\cite{Belz} have brought up interesting
62: results: while the $89^{\circ}$ and $69^{\circ}$ data are
63: consistent with the constituent-quark counting-rule behavior
64: \cite{Matveev} (i.e. at fixed c.m. angle the differential cross
65: section $d\sigma/dt_{\gamma d \rightarrow pn}$ scales as $ \sim
66: s^{-11}$), the $36^{\circ}$ and $52^{\circ}$ data do not show a
67: scaling behavior at all up to $4.0$~GeV photon energy. Thus
68: perturbative QCD (PQCD) cannot be applied at these energies at
69: forward angles and nonperturbative approaches have to be used
70: instead.
71:
72: Some time ago a nonperturbative approach based on the Quark-Gluon
73: Strings Model (QGSM) has been applied to the analysis of the
74: angular and energy dependence of the differential cross section
75: for the $\gamma d\to pn$ reaction in the few GeV energy region
76: \cite{Desanctis}. In the QGSM -- proposed in Ref. \cite{Kaidalov}
77: for the description of binary hadronic reactions -- the amplitude
78: of the reaction $\gamma d \to pn$ is described by the exchange of
79: three valence quarks in the $t$-channel with any number of gluon
80: exchanges between them. This process is visualized in Fig.
81: \ref{fig:qgsm}, where a) and b) describe the exchange of three
82: valence quarks in the $t$- and $u$-channels, respectively.
83:
84: We recall that the QGSM is based on two ingredients: i) a
85: topological expansion in QCD and ii) the space-time picture of the
86: interactions between hadrons, that takes into account the
87: confinement of quarks. The $1/N$ expansion in QCD (where $N$ is
88: the number of colors $N_c$ or flavors $N_f$) was proposed by 't
89: Hooft \cite{Hooft}; the behavior of different quark-gluon graphs
90: according to their topology, furthermore, was analyzed by
91: Veneziano \cite{Veneziano} with the result that in the large $N$
92: limit the planar quark-gluon graphs become dominant. This approach
93: based on the $1/N_f$ expansion \cite{Veneziano} with $N_c \sim
94: N_f$ was used by Kaidalov \cite{Kaidalov,KaidalovSurvey} in the
95: formulation of the QGSM. Again for sufficiently large $N_f$ the
96: simplest planar quark-gluon graphs give the dominant contribution
97: to the amplitudes of binary hadronic reactions. Moreover, it can
98: be shown that in the space-time representation the dynamics
99: described by planar graphs corresponds to the formation and
100: break-up of a quark-gluon string (or color tube) in various
101: intermediate states (see e.g. Refs. \cite{Casher, Artru, Casher2,
102: Andersson, Gurvich}). Here the quark-gluon string can be
103: identified with a corresponding Regge trajectory\footnote{In case
104: of Fig.\ref{fig:qgsm} we have in the intermediate state a string
105: with a quark and a diquark at the ends which corresponds to a
106: nucleon Regge trajectory}. In this sense the QGSM can be
107: considered as a microscopic model of Regge phenomenology and be
108: used for the calculation of different parameters, that have been
109: considered before only on a phenomenological level.
110:
111: As shown in Refs. \cite{Kaidalov,KaidalovSurvey} the QGSM
112: describes rather well the experimental data on exclusive and
113: inclusive hadronic reactions at high energy. Moreover, due to the
114: duality property of scattering amplitudes this approach can also
115: be applied at intermediate energies for reactions without explicit
116: resonances in the direct channel. In fact, this model successfully
117: describes the reactions $pp \to d \pi^+$, $\bar{p}d\to MN$ and
118: $\gamma d \to pn $ at intermediate energies, too, where the
119: diagrams with three valence quark exchanges in the $t$-channel
120: were found to be dominant (cf. Refs.
121: \cite{Desanctis,Kaidalov4,Guaraldo}). However, in all those cases
122: the explicit spin structure of the corresponding amplitudes was
123: not taken into account. On the other hand, spin effects and the
124: transversal polarization of the photon lead to a nontrivial
125: angular dependence of the residue of the amplitude for the
126: reaction $\gamma d \to pn $ as discussed in Ref. \cite{Desanctis}.
127: In this paper we will use an extended approach to the spin effects
128: in the QGSM as developed in Ref. \cite{Chekin} with respect to the
129: description of the electromagnetic nucleon form factors $F_1$ and
130: $F_2$.
131:
132: Another important extension of the QGSM in our study will be the
133: use of nonlinear baryon Regge trajectories. There are
134: phenomenological evidences (see \cite{Lyubimov,UA8,Inopin}) as well as
135: theoretical arguments (see e.g. \cite{Burak} and references
136: therein) that hadronic Regge trajectories should be nonlinear.
137: This nonlinearity is not important for small momentum transfer
138: (squared) $t$, however, in the region of $t$, which has already
139: been reached in the experiment \cite{Holt}, effects of
140: nonlinearity become very essential. We will employ three different
141: forms of nonlinear nucleon Regge trajectories: i) a
142: phenomenological one, which becomes linear at large $t$, and two
143: QCD motivated trajectories of ii) logarithmic and iii) square-root
144: type as suggested recently by Brisudov\'{a}, Burakovsky and
145: Goldman \cite{Burak}. By extrapolating our amplitudes to large
146: angles we can figure out to what momentum transfer $t$ the 'soft
147: QGSM tails' are still important before the PQCD regime becomes
148: dominant.
149:
150: In Section 2 we outline the QGSM and its relation to Regge theory
151: and introduce hadron-quark and quark-hadron transition amplitudes
152: that are described by planar graphs. In Section 3 we construct the
153: $\gamma d \to p n $ amplitude taking into account explicit spin
154: variables. In Section 4 we present the results of our calculations
155: in comparison to the data \cite{Holt} while Section 5 concludes
156: our present study.
157:
158:
159: \section{The Quark-Gluon Strings Model}
160: \label{model}
161:
162: In order to introduce the basic features of the QGSM we consider
163: the binary reactions $\pi ^{0}\pi ^{0}\rightarrow \pi^{+} \pi ^{-}$,
164: $ N \overline{N}\rightarrow\pi ^{+} \pi^{-}$ and $p
165: \overline{p}\rightarrow N\overline{N}$, which at large values of
166: the invariant energy (squared) $s$ and finite values of the
167: 4-momentum transfer (squared) $t$ can be described by planar
168: diagrams with $t$-channel va\-lence-quark exchanges as shown by
169: the diagrams a)-c) in Fig. {\ref{fig:piNNbar}}. Here the single
170: and double solid lines correspond to valence quarks and diquarks,
171: respectively, while soft gluon exchanges between these lines are
172: not shown. According to the topological $1/N_f$ expansion
173: \cite{Veneziano,KaidalovSurvey,Kaidalov1}, these planar diagrams
174: are
175: expected to give the dominant contributions to the corresponding
176: amplitudes in the limit $N_f\gg 1$ and $N_c/N_f\sim 1$. In the
177: case of pion and nucleon interactions -- as considered here -- the
178: exchanges of light $u$, $d$, and $s$ quarks are mainly important
179: and the parameter of the expansion is not small, i.e. $1/N_f=1/3$.
180: However, in case of amplitudes for exclusive reactions with
181: specific quantum numbers in the $t$-channel, the actual expansion
182: parameter is $1/N_f^2 \sim 1/9$ such that the expansion is
183: expected to work.
184:
185: \subsection{Transition probabilities}
186: Each planar diagram of the topological expansion has a simple
187: interpretation within the framework of the space-time pattern
188: formulated in terms of a color tube (or color string)
189: \cite{KaidalovSurvey,Kaidalov3}. As an example we consider the
190: space-time picture
191: of the binary reaction $\pi ^{0}\pi^{0}\rightarrow \pi^{+} {\pi }^{-}$
192: ( cf. Fig.{\ref{fig:piNNbar}} a) ). At high center-of-mass (c.m.)
193: energy $\sqrt{s}$, this reaction occurs due to a specific quark
194: configuration in each pion, where (in the c.m. system) one quark
195: (antiquark) takes almost the entire hadron momentum and plays the
196: role of a spectator, while the valence antiquark (quark) is rather
197: slow. The difference in the rapidities $\Delta y$ between the
198: quark $q$ and antiquark $\bar q$ in each pion is
199: \begin{equation}
200: \label{rapidity}\Delta y = y_q-y_{\bar q}\simeq \frac12\ln \left(
201: \frac s{s_0}\right),
202: \end{equation}
203: with the scale $s_0 \simeq 1$ GeV$^2$. Then the two 'slow' valence
204: partons $q$ and $\bar q$ from $\pi ^{0}$ and $\pi ^{0}$
205: annihilate, and the fast spectator quark and antiquark continue to
206: move in the previous directions and form a color string in the
207: intermediate state. After that, the string breaks due to the
208: production of a $q \bar q$-pair from the vacuum and formation of
209: the $\pi ^{+} \pi ^{-}$ system in the final state. We note, that
210: the same space-time pattern holds for the diagram of Fig.
211: {\ref{fig:piNNbar}} b) with the only difference, that the string
212: is formed after annihilation of a diquark-antidiquark pair from
213: the $N\overline{N} $-system in the initial state. Correspondingly,
214: the graph of Fig. {\ref{fig:piNNbar}} c) shows the formation of
215: the $q\overline{q}$ string due to annihilation of the valence
216: diquark-antidiquark pair in the initial state and the production
217: of another diquark-antidiquark pair due to the breaking of the
218: string.
219:
220: The annihilation of the initial $q\overline{q}$ (or $(qq)
221: (\overline{qq})$) pair takes place, when the gap in rapidity of
222: the valence $q$ and $\overline{q}$ (or $(qq) (\overline{qq})$) is
223: small (both interacting partons are almost at rest in c.m.s.) and
224: the relative impact parameter $\vert {\bf b}_{\perp} -{\bf
225: b}_{0\perp} \vert$ is less than their interaction radius. It is
226: possible to prove that the
227: probability to find a valence quark with a rapidity $y_q$ at
228: impact parameter ${\bf b}_{\perp }$ inside a hadron can be
229: written as \cite{Kaidalov,KaidalovSurvey,Kaidalov3}
230: \begin{equation}
231: \label{probability} w\left(y_q-y_0,{\bf b}_{\perp}-{\bf
232: b}_{0\perp}\right)= \frac c{4\pi R^2(s)}\exp \left[ -\beta
233: (y_q-y_0)-\frac{({\bf b}_{\perp}-{\bf
234: b}_{0\perp})^2}{4R^2(s)}\right] \ ,
235: \end{equation}
236: where $c$ is a normalization constant, $y_0$ is the average
237: rapidity, ${\bf b}_{0\perp}$ is the transverse coordinate of the
238: c.m. system in the impact-parameter representation. Furthermore,
239: it is possible to relate the parameter $\beta$ and the effective
240: interaction radius squared $R^2(s)$ in (\ref{probability}), that
241: specify the quark distribution inside a hadron, to the
242: phenomenological parameters of a Regge trajectory $\alpha _i (t)$
243: which gives the dominant contribution to the amplitude for the
244: considered planar graph. In this case one gets
245: \begin{equation}
246: \label{r2} R^2(s)=R_0^2+\alpha ^{\prime }_i (y_q-y_0)\ ,\quad
247: \beta =1-\alpha_i(0) \ ,
248: \end{equation}
249: where $\alpha_i ^{\prime }=\alpha _i^{\prime }(0)$ is the slope of
250: the dominant Regge trajectory.
251:
252: Due to the creation of a string in the intermediate state the
253: amplitude of a binary reaction $ab\to cd$ has the $s$-channel
254: factorization property, i.e. the probability for the string to
255: produce different hadrons in the final state does not depend on
256: the type of the annihilated quarks and is only determined by the
257: flavours of the produced quarks. The same independence also holds
258: for the production of the color string in the intermediate state
259: from the initial hadron configuration: it depends only on the type
260: of the annihilated quarks. This $s$-channel factorization has been
261: formulated in Refs. \cite {Kaidalov}, \cite{KaidalovSurvey},
262: \cite{Kaidalov3} in terms of
263: transition probabilities as defined by Eq. (\ref{probability}).
264:
265: \subsection{Transition amplitudes}
266: Following Ref. \cite{Chekin} we now generalize this approach by
267: introducing the amplitudes $\widetilde{T}^{ab\to q\bar q} (s,{\bf
268: b}_{\perp})$ and $\widetilde{T}^{q\bar q\to cd}(s,{\bf b}_{\perp
269: })$, that describe the formation and the fission of an
270: intermediate string, respectively. The amplitude for the binary
271: reaction $ab \to cd$ described by the planar graph of Fig.1a) ( b)
272: or c)) can be written -- employing the $s$-channel factorization
273: property -- as a convolution of two amplitudes, i.e.
274: \begin{equation}\label{ImpRepr}
275: A^{ab\rightarrow cd}\left(
276: s,{\bf q}_{\perp }\right) = \frac i{8\pi ^2s}\int d^2{\bf k}_{\perp } \
277: T^{ab\rightarrow q\overline{q}} \left( s,{\bf k }_{\perp }\right)
278: T^{q\overline{q}\rightarrow cd}\left( s,{\bf q }_{\perp }-{\bf
279: k}_{\perp }\right)
280: \end{equation}
281: in momentum representation, or as the product
282: \begin{equation}\label{factorization}
283: \widetilde{A}^{ab\rightarrow cd}(s,{\bf b}_{\perp })=\frac
284: i{2s}\ \widetilde{T}^{ab\to q\bar q}(s,{\bf b}_{\perp })\ \widetilde{T}
285: ^{q\bar q\to cd}(s,{\bf b}_{\perp })
286: \end{equation}
287: in impact-parameter representation.
288:
289: The solution for the quark-hadron transition amplitudes $T^{ q
290: \overline{q} \rightarrow \pi \overline{\pi } }\left( s,{\bf
291: k}_{\perp }\right)$ and $T^{q \overline{q}\rightarrow
292: N\overline{N}}\left( s,{\bf k}_{\perp }\right) $ at large
293: invariant energy $\sqrt{s}$ can be found using single Regge-pole
294: parameterizations of the binary hadronic amplitudes $A^{\pi
295: ^{0}\pi ^{0}\rightarrow \pi^{+} \pi^{-}}$,
296: $A^{N\overline{N}\rightarrow \pi \overline{\pi}}$ and
297: $A^{N\overline{N}\rightarrow N\overline{N}}$
298: \begin{equation}
299: \label{MBDReggeAmplitude}
300: \begin{array}{c}
301: \displaystyle A^{\pi ^{0} \pi ^{0}\rightarrow \pi
302: ^{+}\pi ^{-}}\left( s,t\right) =N_M\ \left( -\frac
303: s{m_0^2}\right) ^{\alpha _M\left( t\right) }\exp \left( R_{0M}^2t\right), \\
304: \displaystyle A^{ N
305: \overline{N}\rightarrow \pi \overline{\pi } }
306: \left( s,t\right) =N_B\ \left( -\frac
307: s{m_0^2}\right) ^{\alpha _B\left( t\right) }\exp \left( R_{0B}^2t\right), \\ \\
308: \displaystyle A^{N\overline{N}\rightarrow
309: N\overline{ N }}\left( s,t\right) =N_D\ \left( -\frac
310: s{m_0^2}\right) ^{\alpha _D\left( t\right) }\exp \left( R_{0D}^2t\right).
311: \end{array}
312: \end{equation}
313: Here $\alpha _M\left( t\right) $, $\alpha _B\left( t\right) $ and
314: $\alpha_D\left( t\right) $ are the dominant meson, baryon and
315: diquark-antidiquark trajectories while $N_M$, $N_M$ and $N_D$ are
316: normalization constants; $m_{0}^2=s_0$ and $R_{0 i}$ is the
317: interaction radius for the i-th trajectory. We have the following
318: intercepts and slopes for the dominant Regge trajectories
319: \begin{equation}
320: \label{ReggePoles}\alpha _M\left( 0\right) \simeq 0.5,\quad \alpha _B\left(
321: 0\right) \simeq -0.5,\quad \alpha _D\left( 0\right) \simeq -1.5
322: \end{equation}
323: and
324: \begin{equation}\label{ReggePoles2}
325: \alpha _M^{\prime }\left( 0\right) \simeq \alpha _B^{\prime }\left( 0\right)
326: \simeq \alpha _D^{\prime }\left( 0\right) \simeq 1.0\ GeV^{-2} .
327: \end{equation}
328: Using equations (\ref{factorization}) and (\ref{MBDReggeAmplitude}) we
329: can write the amplitudes $\widetilde{T}^{q\overline{q}
330: \rightarrow \pi \overline{\pi}}\left( s,{\bf b}_{\perp }\right) $
331: and $\widetilde{T}^{q \overline{q}\rightarrow N\overline{N}}\left(
332: s,{\bf b} _{\perp }\right)$ as
333: \begin{equation} \label{PionNucleonFragmentation}
334: \begin{array}{c}
335: \displaystyle \widetilde{T}^{q\overline{q} \rightarrow \pi \overline{\pi
336: }}(s, {\bf b}_{\perp})=N_M^{1/2}\frac 1{2\sqrt{\pi }R_M\left( s\right)
337: }\left( -\frac s{m_0^2}\right) ^{\left( \alpha _M\left( 0\right) +1\right)
338: /2}\exp \left( - \frac{{\bf b}_{\perp }^2}{8R_M^2\left( s\right) }\right), \\
339: \\
340: \displaystyle \widetilde{T}^{q\overline{q}\rightarrow N \overline{N}}(s,{\bf
341: b}_{\perp})= N_D^{1/2}\frac 1{2\sqrt{\pi }R_D\left(s\right) }
342: \left( -\frac s{m_0^2}\right)^{\left( \alpha _D\left( 0\right)+1\right) /2}
343: \exp \left( -\frac{{\bf b}_{\perp }^2}{8R_D^2\left( s\right)}\right),
344: \end{array}
345: \end{equation}
346: where $R_M\left( s\right) $ and $R_D\left( s\right) $ are the
347: effective interaction radii given by
348: \begin{equation}\label{Radii}
349: \begin{array}{c}
350: \displaystyle R_M^2\left( s\right) =R_{0M}^2+\alpha _M^{\prime }\left( 0\right) \ln \left(
351: -\frac s{m_0^2}\right), \\ \\
352: \displaystyle R_D^2\left( s\right) =R_{0D}^2+\alpha _D^{\prime }\left( 0\right) \ln \left(
353: -\frac s{m_0^2}\right).
354: \end{array}
355: \end{equation}
356: Now substituting the amplitudes (\ref{PionNucleonFragmentation})
357: into the factorization formula (\ref{factorization}) we get:
358: \begin{equation}\label{CrossAmplitude}
359: \begin{array}{c}
360: \displaystyle \widetilde{A}^{N\overline{N}\rightarrow \pi \overline{\pi }}
361: (s,{\bf b}_{\perp })= \\ \\
362: \displaystyle \left( N_MN_D\right) ^{1/2}
363: \frac 1{4\pi R_D\left( s\right) R_M\left( s\right)
364: }\left( -\frac s{m_0^2}\right) ^{\frac 12\left( \alpha _D\left(
365: 0\right) + \alpha _M\left( 0\right) \right) }
366: \exp \left[ -{\bf b}_{\perp }^2 \left(
367: \frac 1{8R_M^2\left( s\right) }+\frac 1{8R_D^2\left( s\right) }\right) \right].
368: \end{array}
369: \end{equation}
370: For consistency of eqs. (\ref{CrossAmplitude}) and
371: (\ref{MBDReggeAmplitude}) we have to require the following
372: relations between the Regge parameters and normalization constants
373: (\cite{Kaidalov,KaidalovSurvey,Kaidalov1}):
374: \begin{equation}\label{OurPlanar} \begin{array}{c}
375: \displaystyle 2\frac 1{R_B^2\left( s\right) }=\frac 1{R_M^2\left( s\right)
376: }+\frac 1{R_D^2\left( s\right) } , \\ \\
377: \displaystyle 2\alpha \left( 0\right) _B=\alpha _D\left( 0\right) +\alpha _M\left(
378: 0\right) ,
379: \end{array}
380: \end{equation}
381: \begin{equation}
382: \label{NormCnst}
383: \left( N_M N_D\right) ^{1/2}\frac 1{R_D\left( s\right)
384: R_M\left( s\right) }=N_B\frac 1{R_B^2\left( s\right) } .
385: \end{equation}
386: If only light $u$, $d$ quarks are involved we can assume that
387: (\cite{Kaidalov,KaidalovSurvey,Kaidalov1})
388: \begin{equation}\label{UDPlanar}
389: \begin{array}{c}
390: \displaystyle \alpha _M^{\prime }\left( 0\right) =\alpha _B^{\prime }\left(
391: 0\right) =\alpha _D^{\prime }\left( 0\right)\equiv \alpha ^{\prime }\left(
392: 0\right),\\ \\
393: \displaystyle R_{0M}^2\left( 0\right) =R_{0B}^2\left( 0\right) =R_{0D}^2\left(
394: 0\right) \equiv R_{0}^2\left( 0\right),\\ \\
395: \left( N_MN_D\right) ^{1/2}=N_B .
396: \end{array}
397: \end{equation}
398: Then the relations (\ref{OurPlanar}) and (\ref{NormCnst}) can be
399: fulfilled at all $s$. Otherwise, they can only be satisfied at
400: sufficiently large $s$ (cf. Ref. (\cite{Kaidalov1})).
401:
402: \section{Deuteron photodisintegration in the QGSM}\label{spin}
403: Before going over to the case of particles with spin we first
404: present the amplitudes for spinless constituents.
405:
406: \subsection{Spinless particles}
407: Using the same approach as in previous Section we now consider the
408: reaction
409: \begin{equation}
410: \gamma d\rightarrow pn.
411: \end{equation}
412: By analogy to Eq. (\ref{factorization}) the amplitude
413: corresponding to each quark diagram of Fig. 1 can be written as
414: \begin{equation}\label{factorizgamd}
415: \widetilde{A}^{\gamma d\to pn}(s,{\bf b}_{\perp })=\frac
416: i{2s}\ \widetilde{T}^{\gamma d\to q (5q)}(s,{\bf b}_{\perp })\ \widetilde{T}
417: ^{q (5q)\to pn}(s,{\bf b}_{\perp }),
418: \end{equation}
419: where the amplitudes $\widetilde{T}^{\gamma d\to q (5q)}(s,{\bf
420: b}_{\perp })$ and $\widetilde{T}^{q (5q)\to pn}(s,{\bf b}_{\perp
421: })$ are given by (cf. (\ref{PionNucleonFragmentation}))
422: \begin{equation} \label{deutFragmentation}
423: \begin{array}{c}
424: \displaystyle \widetilde{T}^{\gamma d \rightarrow q(5q)}
425: (s, {\bf b}_{\perp})=N_{M(6q)}^{1/2}\frac 1{2\sqrt{\pi }R_{M(6q)}
426: \left( s\right)
427: }\left( -\frac s{m_0^2}\right) ^{\left( \alpha _M\left( 0\right) +1\right)
428: /2}\exp \left( - \frac{{\bf b}_{\perp }^2}{8R_{M(6q)}^2\left( s\right) }
429: \right), \\
430: \\
431: \displaystyle \widetilde{T}^{q(5q)\rightarrow pn}(s,{\bf
432: b}_{\perp})= N_{D(6q)}^{1/2}\frac 1{2\sqrt{\pi }
433: R_{D(6q)}\left(s\right) }
434: \left( -\frac s{m_0^2}\right)^{\left( \alpha _D\left( 0\right)+1\right) /2}
435: \exp \left( -\frac{{\bf b}_{\perp }^2}{8R_{D(6q)}^2\left( s\right)}\right).
436: \end{array}
437: \end{equation}
438: Here the effective
439: interaction radii $R_{M(6q)}\left( s\right)$ and $R_{D(6q)}\left( s\right)$
440: are defined as
441: \begin{equation}\label{Radii1}
442: \begin{array}{c}
443: \displaystyle R_{M(6q)}^2\left( s\right)
444: =R_{0M(6q)}^2+\alpha _M^{\prime }\left( 0\right) \ln \left(
445: -\frac s{m_0^2}\right), \\ \\
446: \displaystyle R_{D(6q)}^2\left( s\right) =
447: R_{0D(6q)}^2+\alpha _D^{\prime }\left( 0\right) \ln \left(
448: -\frac s{m_0^2}\right),
449: \end{array}
450: \end{equation}
451: where $R_{0M(6q)}^2$ and $R_{0D(6q)}^2$ are, in general, different
452: from $R_{0M}^2$ and $R_{0D}^2$ in Eq. (\ref{Radii}).
453:
454: \subsection{Full amplitudes with spin variables}
455: In case of constituents with explicit spin we write the deuteron
456: photodisintegration amplitude in the form
457: \begin{eqnarray}\label{ImpReprspin}
458: \lefteqn{ \langle p_3, \lambda_{p}; p_4,
459: \lambda_{n} | \hat{T}\left(s,{\bf p}_{3 \perp}\right)| p_2,
460: \lambda_{d}; p_1, \lambda_{\gamma}\rangle =} \nonumber \\
461: &&\frac i{8\pi ^2s}\int d^2{\bf k}_{\perp } \
462: \langle \lambda_{p};
463: \lambda_{n} | \hat{T}^{q(5q)\rightarrow pn}\left(s,{\bf k}_{\perp}\right)|
464: \lambda_{q};\lambda_{(5q)}\rangle\nonumber \\
465: && \langle \lambda_{q}; \lambda_{(5q)} | \hat{T}^{\gamma d\rightarrow q(5q)}
466: \left(s,{\bf p }_{ 3 \perp}-{\bf k }_{\perp}\right)|
467: \lambda_{d};\lambda_{\gamma}\rangle \ ,
468: \label{convolutionspin}
469: \end{eqnarray}
470: where $p_1$, $p_2$, $p_3$, and $p_4$ are the 4-momenta of the
471: photon, deuteron, proton, and neutron, respectively, while
472: $\lambda_i$ is the $s$ channel helicity of the $i$-th particle.
473: Furthermore, we make simplifying assumption that the spin of the
474: $(5q)$ state is $1/2$. Then we can write the amplitude $\hat
475: {T}^{\gamma d\rightarrow q(5q)}$ as
476: \begin{eqnarray}
477: \lefteqn{ \langle \lambda_{q};
478: \lambda_{(5q)} | \hat{T}\left(s,{\bf k}_{\perp}\right)|
479: \lambda_{d};\lambda_{\gamma}\rangle =} \nonumber \\
480: && \bar u_{\lambda_q}(p_q) \hat {\epsilon}_{\lambda_{\gamma}}
481: \left(\frac{-\hat k+m_q}{k^2-m_q^2}\right)
482: \hat {\epsilon}_{\lambda_d} v_{\lambda_{(5q)}}(p_{(5q)}) \
483: D^{\gamma d\rightarrow q(5q)}(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})\ ,
484: \label{gamdq5qAmpl}
485: \end{eqnarray}
486: where ${\epsilon}_{\lambda_{d}}$ and
487: ${\epsilon}_{\lambda_{\gamma}}$ are the deuteron and photon
488: polarization vectors, $D^{\gamma d\rightarrow q(5q)}(s,{\bf
489: k}_{\perp})$ is the scalar amplitude and $m_q$ is the quark
490: mass. In analogy to $q\overline{q}\rightarrow N\overline{N}$,
491: which was analysed in Ref. \cite{Chekin}, we can describe the spin
492: structure of the amplitude $\hat {T}^{q(5q)\rightarrow pn}$ in
493: terms of eight invariant amplitudes
494: \begin{eqnarray}
495: \lefteqn{ \langle \lambda_{p};
496: \lambda_{n} | \hat{T}^{q+(5q)\rightarrow
497: pn}\left(s,{\bf k}_{\perp}\right)|
498: \lambda_{q};\lambda_{(5q)}\rangle =} \nonumber \\
499: &&D_1(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})\ \delta_{\lambda_p \, \lambda_q}
500: \delta_{\lambda_n \, \lambda_{(5q)}}+
501: D_2(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})\ (\sigma_y)_{\lambda_p \, \lambda_q}
502: \delta_{\lambda_n \, \lambda_{(5q)}}+\nonumber\\
503: &&D_3(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})\ \delta_{\lambda_p \, \lambda_q}
504: (\sigma_y)_{\lambda_n \, \lambda_{(5q)}}+
505: D_4(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})\ (\sigma_x)_{\lambda_p \, \lambda_q}
506: (\sigma_x)_{\lambda_n \, \lambda_{(5q)}}+\nonumber\\
507: &&D_5(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})\ (\sigma_y)_{\lambda_p \, \lambda_q}
508: (\sigma_y)_{\lambda_n \, \lambda_{(5q)}}+
509: D_6(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})\ (\sigma_z)_{\lambda_p \, \lambda_q}
510: (\sigma_z)_{\lambda_n \, \lambda_{(5q)}}+\nonumber\\
511: &&D_7(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})\ (\sigma_x)_{\lambda_p \, \lambda_q}
512: (\sigma_z)_{\lambda_n \, \lambda_{(5q)}}+
513: D_8(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})\ (\sigma_z)_{\lambda_p \, \lambda_q}
514: (\sigma_x)_{\lambda_n \, \lambda_{(5q)}} \ ,
515: \label{q5qpnAmpl}
516: \end{eqnarray}
517: where the $z$- and $x$-axes are directed along the photon
518: momentum and the momentum transfer ${\bf k}_{\perp}$,
519: respectively, and the $y$-axis is orthogonal to the scattering
520: plane.
521:
522: Now the experimental data on the proton form factor are in
523: agreement with the assumption, that the dominant contribution
524: stems from the amplitude corresponding to the conservation of the
525: $s$-channel helicities (cf. Ref. \cite{Chekin}). Here we shall
526: use the same assumption and take into account only the amplitude
527: $D_1(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})$. We thus find
528: \begin{eqnarray}
529: \lefteqn{ \langle \lambda_{p};
530: \lambda_{n} | \hat{T}\left(s,{\bf p}_{3 \perp}\right)|
531: \lambda_{d};\lambda_{\gamma}\rangle =} \nonumber \\
532: &&\frac i{8\pi ^2s}\int \! d^2{\bf k}_{\perp } \
533: \bar u_{\lambda_p}(p_3) \hat {\epsilon}_{ \lambda_{\gamma}}
534: \left(\frac{-\hat k+m_q}{k^2-m_q^2}\right)
535: \hat {\epsilon}_{\lambda_{d}} v_{\lambda_n}(p_4) \nonumber \\
536: && \times D^{\gamma d\rightarrow q(5q)}(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})
537: \ D_{1}(s,{\bf p}_{3 \perp}-{\bf k}_{\perp}).
538: \label{convolutionspin1}
539: \end{eqnarray}
540: Furthermore, taking into account that at high energy
541: $p_{\gamma}\gg \sqrt{s_0}$ and finite momentum transfer $t\simeq
542: |{\bf p}_{3\,\perp}|^2\simeq s_0$ the momentum $k$ is almost
543: transversal $k=(k_0,{\bf k}_{\perp},k_z)$, where $\displaystyle
544: k_0\simeq k_z\simeq O\left(\frac{s_0}{2 p_{\gamma}}\right)$ and
545: $\int \! d^2{\bf k}_{\perp}\ {\bf k }_{\perp}(...) \sim {\bf
546: p}_{3\,\perp}$, we find the following representation for the spin
547: structure of the $\gamma d\rightarrow pn$ amplitude:
548: \begin{eqnarray}
549: \lefteqn{ \langle \lambda_{p};
550: \lambda_{n} | \hat{T}\left(s,{\bf p}_{3 \perp}\right)|
551: \lambda_{d};\lambda_{\gamma}\rangle =} \nonumber \\
552: && \bar u_{\lambda_p}(p_3) \hat {\epsilon}_{\lambda_{\gamma}}
553: \left({A(s,t){\bf p}_{3\,\perp}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath $\gamma$}
554: +B(s,t) m}\right)
555: \hat {\epsilon}_{\lambda_{d}} v_{\lambda_n}(p_4)\ ,
556: \label{spin1}
557: \end{eqnarray}
558: where
559: \begin{eqnarray}
560: &&A(s,t)=\frac i{8\pi ^2s}\int \! d^2{\bf k}_{\perp } \
561: \frac{{\bf k}_{\perp}\cdot{\bf p}_{3\,\perp}}
562: {|{\bf p}_{3\,\perp}|^2}\
563: \frac{1}{k^2-m_q^2} \nonumber \\
564: &&\times D^{\gamma d\rightarrow q(5q)}(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})
565: \ D_{1}^{q(5q)\rightarrow pn}(s,{\bf p}_{3\, \perp}-{\bf k}_{\perp})\ ,
566: \label{convolutionscalarA}\\
567: &&B(s,t)=\frac i{8\pi ^2s} \frac{m_q}{m}\int \! d^2{\bf k}_{\perp } \
568: \frac{1}{k^2-m_q^2} \nonumber \\
569: &&\times D^{\gamma d\rightarrow q(5q)}(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})
570: \ D_{1}^{q(5q)\rightarrow pn}(s,{\bf p}_{3\, \perp}-{\bf k}_{\perp})\ ,
571: \label{convolutionscalarB}
572: \end{eqnarray}
573: and $m$ is the nucleon mass. In the case of a Gaussian parametrization
574: for $ D^{\gamma d\rightarrow q(5q)}(s,{\bf k}_{\perp})$ and $D_1$
575: (in Eqs. (24,25)) the ratio $R={A(s,t)}/{B(s,t)}$
576: is a smooth function of $t$. We, furtheron, assume that it is a
577: constant and consider this constant as a free parameter.
578:
579: The differential cross section for the reaction $\gamma
580: d\rightarrow pn$ then is
581: \begin{eqnarray}
582: &\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma^{I}_{\gamma d\to pn}}{d t}& =
583: \frac{1}{64\,\pi s}\ \frac{1}{(p_{\gamma}^{\mathrm{cm}})^2}\
584: \left[S_{t}\ |B(s,t)|^2+S_u\ |B(s,u)|^2 \right. \nonumber\\
585: &&\left. +(-1)^{I+1}\ 2S_{tu}\
586: {\mathrm Re}(B(s,t)B(s,u)\right],
587: \label{eq:sigt}
588: \end{eqnarray}
589: where~$I$ is the isospin of the reaction, i.e. $I=1$ (or $0$) for
590: isovector (or isoscalar) photons. The kinematical functions $S_t$,
591: $S_u$, $S_{tu}$ in (\ref{eq:sigt}) are given by
592: \begin{eqnarray}
593: S_t=\frac{1}{6}\ \sum _{\lambda_{\gamma},\ \lambda_{d}}
594: {\mathrm {Sp}}\ \left[ \hat {\epsilon}_{\lambda_{\gamma}}
595: \left(R \,{\bf p}_{3\,\perp}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath $\gamma$}
596: + m \right)
597: \hat {\epsilon}_{\lambda_{d}}
598: \left(\hat {p}_4- m \right) \right. \nonumber \\
599: \times \left. \hat {\epsilon}^{\star}_{\lambda_{d}}
600: \left(R \, {\bf p}_{3\,\perp}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath $\gamma$}
601: + m \right)
602: \hat {\epsilon}^{\star}_{\lambda_{\gamma}}
603: \left(\hat {p}_3+ m \right) \right] \ ,\nonumber \\
604: S_u=\frac{1}{6}\ \sum _{\lambda_{\gamma},\ \lambda_{d}}
605: {\mathrm {Sp}}\ \left[ \hat {\epsilon}_{\lambda_{d}}
606: \left(R\, {\bf p}_{3\,\perp}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath $\gamma$}
607: + m \right)
608: \hat {\epsilon}_{\lambda_{\gamma}}
609: \left(\hat {p}_4- m \right) \right. \nonumber \\ \times \left.
610: \hat {\epsilon}^{\star}_{\lambda_{\gamma}} \left(R\, {\bf
611: p}_{3\,\perp}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath $\gamma$} + m \right) \hat
612: {\epsilon}^{\star}_{\lambda_{d}} \left(\hat {p}_3+ m
613: \right)\right] \ ,\nonumber\\ S_{tu}=\frac{1}{6}\ \sum
614: _{\lambda_{\gamma},\ \lambda_{d}} {\mathrm {Sp}}\ \left[ \hat
615: {\epsilon}_{\lambda_{\gamma}} \left(R \, {\bf p}_{3\,\perp}\cdot
616: \mbox{\boldmath $\gamma$} + m \right) \hat
617: {\epsilon}_{\lambda_{d}} \left(\hat {p}_4- m \right)\right.
618: \nonumber \\ \times \left. \hat
619: {\epsilon}^{\star}_{\lambda_{\gamma}} \left(R\, {\bf
620: p}_{3\,\perp}\cdot \mbox{\boldmath $\gamma$} + m \right) \hat
621: {\epsilon}^{\star}_{\lambda_{d}} \left(\hat {p}_3+ m
622: \right)\right] \ .
623: \end{eqnarray}
624: In order to fix the energy dependence of the amplitude $B(s,t)$ we
625: require that \begin{equation} \displaystyle \left.\frac{{\mathrm
626: d}\sigma}{{\mathrm d }t} \right|_{\; \Theta_{{\mathrm
627: c.m.}}=0}\sim \left(\frac{s}{s_0}\right)^{2\alpha_N(0)-2} \ .
628: \end{equation} Taking into account that $S_{t}\sim s$ for $s\gg s_0$ we
629: find that \begin{equation}
630: \displaystyle
631: B(s,t)\sim\left(\frac{s}{s_0}\right)^ {\alpha_N(0)-1/2} \ .
632: \end{equation} Moreover, a good approximation for the energy dependence
633: of $S_t(\theta_{{\mathrm c.m.}}=0)$ in the region $p_{\gamma}=
634: 1\div 7.5$~GeV is \begin{equation} \left.S_t \right|_{\;
635: \theta_{{\mathrm c.m.}}=0}\approx C p_{\gamma}^2 \end{equation}
636: with $C=(36\pm 3)~$GeV$^2$. Using this approximation we can relate
637: $B(s,t)$ to the Regge-pole exchange amplitude as
638: \begin{equation}
639: |B(s,t)|^{2}=\frac{1}{C p_{\gamma}^2}\
640: |\mathcal{M}_{{\mathrm Regge }}(s,t)|^2\ ,
641: \label{Bst}
642: \end{equation}
643: where
644: \begin{equation}
645: \mathcal{M}_{{\mathrm Regge}}(s,t)= F(t)
646: \left(\frac{s}{s_0}\right)^{\alpha_{N}(t)} \exp{\left[
647: -i\ \frac{\pi}{2}\left(\alpha_{N}(t) -
648: \frac{1}{2}\right)\right]}\ .
649: \label{eq:Mregge}
650: \end{equation}
651: Here $\alpha_N(t)$ is the trajectory of the nucleon Regge pole and
652: $s_0 =4~\mathrm{GeV}^2 \simeq m_d^2$.
653:
654: \subsection{Nonlinear nucleon Regge trajectories}
655: According to the data on $\pi N$ backward scattering (see e.g. the
656: review \cite{Lyubimov}) the nucleon Regge trajectory has a
657: nonlinearity:
658: \begin{equation}
659: \alpha_{N}(t)= \alpha_{N}(0) +\alpha'_{N}(0)\, t +
660: \frac{1}{2}\, \alpha''_{N}(0)\, t^2 \, K(t),
661: \label{eq:alpha1}
662: \end{equation}
663: where $\alpha_{N}(0)=-0.5$, $\alpha'_{N}(0)=0.9\
664: \mathrm{GeV}^{-2}$ are the intercept and slope of the Regge
665: trajectory, $\alpha''_{N}(0)= 0.20 \div 0.25 \mathrm{GeV}^{-4}$ is
666: the coefficient of the nonlinear term. In (\ref{eq:alpha1}) we
667: introduced also a cut-off function $K(t)$. In Ref. \cite{Lyubimov}
668: it was assumed that $K(t) =1$. However, in this case the amplitude
669: will grow very fast with $s$ at large $t$ which would violate
670: unitarity. To prevent this fast growth it was taken in Ref.
671: \cite{Desanctis} as a powerlike cut-off $ K(t)=(1+ {t^4}/{{\Lambda
672: }^4})^{-1}$. Here we choose the exponential form
673: \begin{equation}
674: K(t)=\exp\left({-\beta t^2}\right) \end{equation}
675: with $\beta =
676: 0.008\, \mathrm{GeV}^{-4}$. We mention that the small value of
677: $\beta$ does not destroy the parameterization of $\alpha(t)$ for
678: $-t \leq 1.6\ \mathrm{GeV}^2$ found in Ref. \cite{Lyubimov}. Note
679: also that the phenomenological Regge trajectory (\ref{eq:alpha1})
680: with a powerlike or exponential cut-off is nonlinear only for
681: moderate values of $t$; at large $t$ the quadratic term becomes
682: small and the trajectory becomes essentially linear again.
683:
684: On the other hand, the QCD motivated Regge trajectories as
685: suggested by Brisudov\'{a}, Burakovsky and Goldman (BBG)
686: \cite{Burak} show a different behaviour at large $t$. As shown in
687: Ref. \cite{Burak} the screened quark-antiquark potential
688: \begin{equation}
689: V(R)=\left[ -\frac{\alpha}{R}+\sigma R \right] \frac{1-\exp (- \mu R)}{\mu R}
690: \end{equation}
691: with $\sigma=$(400~MeV)$^2$, $\mu^{-1} =0.90 \pm 0.20$~fm, $\alpha
692: =0.21\pm0.1$, found in Ref. \cite{Born} to describe the lattice
693: QCD data with dynamical Kogut-Susskind fermions, leads to
694: nonlinear meson Regge trajectories. These trajectories can be
695: parametrized on the whole physical sheet as
696: \begin{equation}
697: \alpha(t) = \alpha(0)+ \gamma \left[ T^{\nu} - \left(T-t\right)^{\nu}
698: \right] \label{eq:nonlinBBG}
699: \end{equation}
700: with $0\leq \nu \leq 1/2$. The limiting cases $\nu=1/2$ and $\nu
701: \to 0$ ($\gamma \nu =$ const) correspond to the square-root
702: trajectory
703: \begin{equation}
704: \alpha(t) = \alpha(0)+ \gamma \left[ \sqrt{T} - \sqrt{T-t}
705: \right],
706: \label{eq:sqroot}
707: \end{equation}
708: and the logarithmic trajectory
709: \begin{equation}
710: \alpha(t) = \alpha(0)- (\gamma \nu) \ln\left(1 - \frac{t}{T}
711: \right) \label{eq:log}
712: \end{equation}
713: respectively. Such trajectories arise not only for heavy
714: quarkonia, but also for light-flavour hadrons.
715:
716: To find the possible form of nonlinear Regge trajectories for
717: mesons composed of light quarks, Brisudov\'{a}, Burakovsky and
718: Goldman \cite{Burak} have considered an analytical model for a
719: string with massless ends and variable string tension. This model
720: describes a colour flux tube stretched between quark and antiquark
721: at the tube ends. The varying string tension was introduced to
722: simulate dynamical effects such as the weakening of the flux tube
723: due to pair ($q \bar{q}$) creation. Within this model they were
724: able to recover the form of the underlying potential for a given
725: Regge trajectory. They found potentials leading to
726: ``square-root'' and ``logarithmic'' Regge trajectories and
727: demonstrated, that these potentials are very similar to the
728: screened potential of the unquenched lattice QCD calculations.
729: Moreover, they were able to describe very well all the available
730: meson spectra using a square-root Regge trajectory. Nevertheless,
731: the ``logarithmic'' form of Regge trajectories can not be excluded
732: by now and new data on higher excited states are necessary.
733:
734: We know from experiment that the slopes of meson and baryon Regge
735: trajectories are almost the same $\alpha^{\prime}_N \simeq
736: \alpha^{\prime}_{\rho} \simeq 0.9-1 $ GeV$^{-2}$ (see e.g. the
737: review \cite{KaidalovSurvey}). The slope is determimed by the string
738: tension which depends on the colour charges at the string ends.
739: Therefore, the baryon Regge trajectory can be described by the
740: colour flux model with quark and diquark at the ends (cf Ref.
741: \cite{Kobzarev}). This means that for the baryon Regge
742: trajectories we can also use the forms suggested by BBG.
743:
744: When using the QCD motivated trajectories (\ref{eq:sqroot}) and
745: (\ref{eq:log}) we take their intercepts and slopes the same as in
746: case of the phenomenological trajectories. Therefore, only a
747: single free parameter will be left. We choose $T=T_B$ as this free
748: parameter and fix it by comparing our results to experimental
749: data.
750:
751: \section{Cross sections for deuteron photodisintegration in the QGSM}
752: \label{sec:results}
753:
754: \subsection{Choice of parameters}
755:
756: The dependence of the residue $F(t)$ on $t$ can be taken from
757: Refs. \cite {Kaidalov4,Guaraldo} in the form
758: \begin{equation}
759: F(t) = B {\left[\frac{1}{m^2 - t}\ \exp{(R_1^2t)} + C\, \exp{(R_2^2
760: t)} \right]}\ ,
761: \label{eq:resid1}
762: \end{equation}
763: where the first term in the square brackets contains the nucleon
764: pole and the second term accounts for the contribution of
765: non-nucleonic degrees of freedom in the deuteron. We adopted the
766: following sets of parameters:\\ i) for the case of the
767: phenomenological nonlinear trajectory
768: \begin{eqnarray}
769: &&\mathrm{Set\ K \!:}\ \;
770: B=3.32\cdot10^{-4}\, \mathrm{kb}^{1/2}\cdot\mathrm{GeV},\;
771: C = 0.7\ \mathrm{GeV}^{-2} , \nonumber\\
772: &&\hphantom{Set\ K \!:}\ R_1^2 = 1\ \mathrm{GeV}^{-2} , \;
773: R_2^2 =- 0.1\ \mathrm{GeV}^{-2} , \;
774: \alpha''_{N(0)}= 0.20\, \mathrm{GeV}^{-4}
775: \: , \nonumber \\
776: &&\mathrm{Set\ G \!:}\ \;
777: B=4.01\cdot10^{-4}\, \mathrm{kb}^{1/2}\cdot\mathrm{GeV} ,\;
778: C = 0.7\ \mathrm{GeV}^{-2} , \nonumber\\
779: &&\hphantom{Set\ K \!:}\ R_1^2 = 2\ \mathrm{GeV}^{-2} , \;
780: R_2^2 = 0.03\ \mathrm{GeV}^{-2}
781: ,\;
782: \alpha''_{N(0)}= 0.25\, \mathrm{GeV}^{-4}
783: \:
784: \end{eqnarray}
785: and the ratio $R=A(s,t)/B(s,t)=1$ for both sets K and G. The
786: parameters of the residue (\ref{eq:resid1}) in $\mathrm{Set\ K}$,
787: except the overall normalization factor $B$ and $R^2_1$, are the
788: same as in Ref. \cite{Kaidalov4} which were fitted to data on the
789: reaction $pp \to \pi^+ d$ for $-t \leq 1.6\ \mathrm{GeV}^2$.
790: Therefore, in this case we have only two free parameters of the
791: residue $B$ and $R_1^2$ which we fixed by the experimental data on
792: deuteron photodisintegration at
793: $\Theta_{\mathrm{c.m.}}=36^{\circ}$. We note that $\mathrm{Set\
794: G}$ corresponds to positive values of $R_2^{2}$;\\ ii) for the
795: case of the QCD motivated Regge trajectories we have used the
796: parameters of the residue from Set~G except an overall
797: normalization factor $B$ taken as $B=1.8 \cdot 10^{-4}$ kb$^{1/2}
798: \cdot $ GeV for the logarithmic and $B=2.0 \cdot 10^{-4}$
799: kb$^{1/2} \cdot $ GeV for the square-root trajectory. Furthermore,
800: we choose $R=A(s,t)/B(s,t)=2$ for both trajectories (logarithmic
801: and square-root). In order to achieve a good agreement with the
802: data at $\Theta_{\mathrm{c.m.}}=36^{\circ}$ the nonlinearity
803: parameter $T=T_B$ was chosen in the interval 1.5-1.7 GeV$^2$.
804:
805: \subsection{Energy dependence of the differential cross section}
806:
807: In Fig. \ref{fig:gd36:89} we present the energy dependence of
808: ${d\sigma}/{dt}\cdot s^{11}$ at different c.m. angles calculated
809: for the case of the phenomenological nonlinear trajectory
810: (\ref{eq:alpha1}). The experimental points are taken from
811: \cite{Holt}. The bold solid and dash-dotted lines present results
812: of calculations within the QGSM for parameters of the Set G and
813: Set~K, respectively. The thin lines show the results obtained in
814: the case of the linear Regge trajectories with residue parameters
815: from Set~G (thin solid line) and Set K (thin dash-dotted line).
816: For $\Theta_{\mathrm{c.m.}}=36^{\circ}$ (see the top-left part)
817: all the curves except the thin solid line are in a reasonable
818: agreement with the data. Therefore, for this angle it is also
819: possible to describe the data using a linear nucleon Regge
820: trajectory. However, at large angles
821: $\Theta_{\mathrm{c.m.}}=52^{\circ}$, $69^{\circ}$ and $89^{\circ}$
822: the nonlinearity becomes essential since the thin curves
823: underestimate the experimental points substantially. The use of
824: the nonlinear Regge trajectory instead provides a reasonable
825: description of the existing data and reproduces the scaling
826: behavior of $d\sigma/dt\cdot s^{11}$ for
827: $\Theta_{\mathrm{c.m.}}=69^{\circ}$ and $89^{\circ}$ at energies
828: $E_{\gamma}\le 5$~GeV. At higher energies all curves drop very
829: fast.
830:
831: In Fig. \ref{fig:gd36:89b} the energy dependence of
832: ${d\sigma}/{dt}\cdot s^{11}$ at different c.m. angles is
833: calculated for the cases of the square-root (\ref{eq:sqroot})
834: (dash-dotted lines)
835: and logarithmic (\ref{eq:log}) (dashed lines) Regge trajectories.
836: The lower and upper curves were calculated with $T_B=$1.7 and 1.5
837: GeV$^2$, respectively. As noted before, the ratio of the invariant
838: amplitudes $R=A(s,t)/B(s,t)$ is taken as $R$= 2. It is seen that
839: the result of the square-root trajectory leads to a cross section
840: which underestimates the data for $\Theta_{\mathrm{c.m.}}\geq
841: 52^{\circ}$, while the logarithmic trajectory provides a
842: reasonable description of the data at all angles (with the
843: exception of a single point at
844: $\Theta_{\mathrm{c.m.}}=89^{\circ}$, $E_{\gamma}= 4$ GeV).
845: Therefore, new measurements of $d\sigma/dt$ at $E_{\gamma}\ge
846: 5$~GeV will provide a crucial check of the QGSM predictions.
847:
848: \subsection{Angular dependence of the cross section}
849:
850: In Fig. \ref{fig:dsg} we show the angular dependence of the
851: differential cross section as a function of
852: $\Theta_{\mathrm{c.m}.}$ calculated for $E_{\gamma}$ =1.6 GeV and
853: 3.98 GeV using the phenomenological nonlinear trajectory
854: (\ref{eq:alpha1}) with $\alpha ^{\prime \prime}(0) = 0.25 $
855: GeV$^{-4}$ and residue parameters of the set G. Here we have
856: assumed isovector photon dominance and therefore obtain a
857: forward-backward symmetric cross sections. Both angular
858: distributions have forward and backward peaks, which are mainly
859: related to the choice $R=A(s,t)/B(s,t)$=1 in this case. The
860: agreement between data and calculations is fairly good.
861:
862: \subsection{Forward-backward asymmetry}
863: In Fig. \ref{fig:dsgb1} we present the angular dependence of
864: ${d\sigma}/{dt}\cdot s^{11}$ at different energies for the
865: logarithmic (\ref{eq:log}) Regge trajectory. The lower and
866: upper parts correspond to $E_{\gamma}$ = 3.98 and 1.6 GeV,
867: respectively. The two dashed curves in each figure were calculated
868: assuming isovector photon dominance. In this case we have a
869: forward-backward symmetry of the differential cross section. At
870: 1.6 GeV the angular distribution has a dip at
871: $\Theta_{\mathrm{c.m.}}$ =0$^{\circ}$ and 180$^{\circ}$ which is
872: related to the different choice of the ratio $R~ (R=2)$ as
873: compared to the previous case $(R=1)$.
874:
875: A forward-backward asymmetry arises when we take into account the
876: interference of two amplitudes which describe the contribution of
877: isovector ($\rho$ like) and isoscalar ($\omega $ like) photons. In
878: this case the differential cross section can be written as
879: \begin{eqnarray}
880: &\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma^{\rho+\omega}_{\gamma d\to pn}}{d t}& =
881: \frac{1}{64\,\pi s}\ \frac{1}{(p_{\gamma}^{\mathrm{cm}})^2}\
882: \left[S_{t}\ |B^{\rho}(s,t)+B^{\omega}(s,t)|^2+ \right. \nonumber\\
883: &&S_u\
884: |B^{\rho}(s,u)-B^{\omega}(s,u)|^2 \nonumber\\
885: &&\left. + 2S_{tu}\
886: {\mathrm Re}\left(B^{\rho}(s,t)+B^{\omega}(s,t)\right)^{\star}
887: \left(B^{\rho}(s,u)-B^{\omega}(s,u)\right)\right].
888: \label{eq:sigtas}
889: \end{eqnarray}
890: Using the vector dominance model we take
891: \begin{equation}
892: B^{\omega}(s,t)=B^{\rho}(s,t)/\sqrt{8}, \hspace{1cm}
893: B^{\omega}(s,u)=B^{\rho}(s,u)/\sqrt{8}. \end{equation} The data at
894: 1.6 GeV provide an evidence for a forward-backward asymmetry
895: because the values of the differential cross sections at backward
896: angles are smaller than for the corresponding angles in the
897: forward region. The predictions of the simple VDM model with $\rho
898: -\omega$ interference are in qualitative agreement with the data
899: (long-dashed curves). However, for definite conclusions we will
900: need more systematic data at smaller angles in the forward and
901: also in the backward regions.
902:
903: \section{Conclusions}
904: \label{sec:conc}
905:
906: In this work we have analyzed deuteron photodisintegration at GeV
907: energies within the framework of the Quark-Gluon Strings Model
908: with nonlinear Regge trajectories. We have taken into account spin
909: effects assuming the dominance of those amplitudes that conserve
910: $s$-channel helicities. We have found that the QGSM provides a
911: reasonable description of the new TJNAF data on deuteron
912: photodisintegration at large momentum transfer $t$ and that the
913: energy dependence of ${\mathrm{d}} {\sigma}/{\mathrm d}t$ at
914: $\Theta_{\mathrm{c.m.}} = 36\div 90^{\circ}$ provides new evidence
915: for a nonlinearity of the Regge trajectory $\alpha_N(t)$. The best
916: agreement with the data can be achieved using the QCD motivated
917: logarithmic form of the Regge trajectory. However, new data at
918: larger energies will be important to further check
919: the energy behaviour of
920: $d\sigma/dt $ at fixed c.m. angles as predicted by the QGSM.
921:
922: We have also investigated the angular dependence of the cross
923: section at different energies. The differential cross section may
924: have a dip at forward angles if the amplitude with a charge-like
925: photon coupling ($A(s,t)$ ) is dominant. By introducing the
926: interference of isovector and isoscalar photon contributions we
927: have calculated the forward-backward asymmetry of the cross
928: section, which can be quite pronounced at $E_{\gamma}$ = 1.6 GeV,
929: but will be a decreasing function of energy. New data for small
930: and large angles (forward and backward) will be important to check these
931: predictions.
932:
933:
934:
935: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
936: \bibitem{Holt} E89-012 Collaboration: C. Bochna,
937: B.P. Terburg {\it et al.}, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett. \/} {81} (1998) 4576.
938:
939: \bibitem{Napolitano} J.~Napolitano {\it et al.},
940: {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.\/} {\bf 61 } (1988) 2530;
941: S.J.~Freedman {\it et al.}, {\em Phys. Rev. C\/} {\bf 48 } (1993) 1864.
942:
943: \bibitem{Belz} J.E.~Belz {\it et al.}, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.\/} {\bf 74 } (1995) 646.
944:
945: \bibitem{Matveev} S.J.~Brodsky and G.R.~Farrar,
946: {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.\/} {\bf 31 } (1973) 1153;
947:
948: V.~Matveev, R.M.~Muradyan, A.N.~Tavkhelidze,
949: {\em Lett. Nuovo Cimento \/} {\bf 7} (1973) 719
950:
951: \bibitem{Desanctis} L.A. Kondratyuk, E. De Sanctis, P. Rossi et al.,
952: {\em Phys. Rev. C\/} {\bf 48 } (1993) 2491.
953:
954: \bibitem{Kaidalov} A.B. Kaidalov, {\em Z. Phys. C\/} {\bf 12} (1982)
955: 63.
956:
957: \bibitem{Hooft} G. 't Hooft, {\em Nucl. Phys. B\/} {\bf 72} (1974)
958: 461.
959:
960: \bibitem{Veneziano} G. Veneziano, {\em Phys. Lett. B\/}
961: {\bf 52} (1974) 220; {\em Nucl. Phys. B\/} {\bf 117} (1976) 519.
962:
963: \bibitem{KaidalovSurvey} A.B. Kaidalov, in {\em "Surveys in High Energy
964: Physics"} {\bf 13} (1999) 265.
965:
966: \bibitem{Casher} A. Casher, J. Kogut and L. Susskind,
967: {\em Phys. Rev. D\/} {\bf 10} (1974) 732.
968:
969: \bibitem{Artru} X. Artru and G. Mennesier,
970: {\em Nucl. Phys. B\/} {\bf 70} (1974) 93.
971:
972: \bibitem{Casher2} A. Casher, H. Neuberger and S. Nussinov,
973: {\em Phys. Rev. D\/} {\bf 20} (1979) 179.
974:
975: \bibitem{Andersson} B. Andersson, G. Gustafson and C. Peterson,
976: {\em Phys. Lett. B\/} {\bf 71} (1977) 337;
977: {\em Z. Phys. C\/} {\bf 1} (1979) 105.
978:
979: \bibitem{Gurvich} E. G. Gurvich, {\em Phys. Lett. B\/}
980: {\bf 87} (1979) 386.
981:
982: \bibitem{Kaidalov4} A.B. Kaidalov, {\em Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.\/} {\bf
983: 53} (1991) 872.
984:
985: \bibitem{Guaraldo} C. Guaraldo, A.B. Kaidalov, L.A. Kondratyuk
986: and Ye.S.\ Golubeva, {\em Yad. Fiz.\/} {\bf 59} (1996) 1896;
987: {\em Phys. Atom. Nucl.\/} {\bf 59} (1996) 1832.
988:
989: \bibitem{Chekin} A.B. Kaidalov, L.A.Kondratyuk, D.V. Tchekin,
990: {\em Yad. Fiz.\/} {\bf 63} (2000) 1474; {\em Phys. Atom. Nucl.\/}
991: {\bf 63} (2000) 1395.
992:
993: \bibitem{Lyubimov} V.A. Lyubimov, {\em Sov. Phys. Uspekhi\/} {\bf 20}
994: (1977) 691.
995:
996: \bibitem{UA8} UA8 Coll. (A.Brandt {\it et al.}),
997: {\em Nucl. Phys. B\/}
998: {\bf 514} (1998) 3.
999:
1000: \bibitem{Inopin} A.E.~Inopin, hep-th/0012248.
1001:
1002: \bibitem{Burak} M.M.~Brisudov\'{a}, L.Burakovsky and T.~Goldman,
1003: {\em Phys. Rev. D\/} {\bf 61 } (2000) 054013.
1004:
1005:
1006: \bibitem{Kaidalov1} A.B. Kaidalov, {\em JETP Lett.\/} {\bf 32} (1980)
1007: 474.
1008:
1009: \bibitem{Kaidalov3} A.B. Kaidalov, in ``QCD at 200 TeV'',
1010: edited by L. Cifarelli and Yu. Dokshitzer,
1011: Plenum Press, N.Y. and London, 1992, p.1
1012:
1013: \bibitem{Born} K.D. Born et al.,
1014: {\em Phys. Rev. D\/} {\bf 40 } (1989) 1653.
1015:
1016: \bibitem{Kobzarev} I. Kobzarev et al., {\em Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.\/}
1017: {\bf 45} (1987) 330.
1018:
1019: \end{thebibliography}
1020:
1021: \pagebreak
1022: \begin{figure}[htb]
1023: \begin{center}
1024: \leavevmode
1025: \psfig{file=gdpn.eps,width=14.cm}
1026: \caption{Diagrams describing three valence quark exchanges in $t$- (a) and
1027: $u$-channels (b).} \label{fig:qgsm}
1028: \end{center}
1029: \end{figure}
1030:
1031: \pagebreak
1032: \begin{figure}
1033: \begin{center}
1034: \leavevmode
1035: \psfig{file=pland1.eps,width=14.cm}
1036: \caption{Planar diagrams describing the binary reactions
1037: a) ${\pi}^{0} {\pi}^{0} \rightarrow {\pi}^{+} {\pi}^{-}$, b) $N
1038: \bar {N} \rightarrow {\pi}^{+} {\pi}^{-} $, c) $p \bar {p}
1039: \rightarrow N \bar {N}$.} \label{fig:piNNbar}
1040: \end{center}
1041: \end{figure}
1042:
1043: \pagebreak
1044: \begin{figure}[gd36:89]
1045: \begin{center}
1046: \leavevmode
1047: \psfig{file=gdrel.epsi,width=14.cm}
1048: \caption{Differential cross section for the
1049: reaction $\gamma d\to pn$ (multiplied
1050: by $s^{11}$) as a function of the photon lab. energy $E_{\gamma}$
1051: at different angles in the center-of-mass frame in comparison to
1052: the experimental data from Ref. \cite{Holt}. The bold solid and
1053: dash-dotted curves present results of calculations using a
1054: phenomenological Regge trajectory for parameter Set G and Set K,
1055: respectively. The thin lines show the results obtained in the case
1056: of the linear Regge trajectories, i.e. for $\alpha''_{N(0)}= 0$,
1057: with the same parameters of the residue as in Set G (solid line)
1058: and Set K (dash-dotted line).} \label{fig:gd36:89}
1059: \end{center}
1060: \end{figure}
1061:
1062: \pagebreak
1063: \begin{figure}[gd36:89b]
1064: \begin{center}
1065: \leavevmode
1066: \psfig{file=gdrelb.epsi,width=14.cm}
1067: \caption{Differential cross section for the
1068: reaction $\gamma d\to pn$ (multiplied
1069: by $s^{11}$) as a function of the photon lab. energy $E_{\gamma}$
1070: at different angles in the center-of-mass frame in comparison to
1071: the experimental data from Ref. \cite{Holt}. The dashed and
1072: dash-dotted curves are calculated using the logarithmic and
1073: square-root Regge trajectories, respectively.}
1074: \label{fig:gd36:89b}
1075: \end{center}
1076: \end{figure}
1077:
1078: \pagebreak
1079: \begin{figure}[dsg]
1080: \begin{center}
1081: \leavevmode
1082: \psfig{file=dsg.epsi,width=14.cm}
1083: \caption{Differential cross section for the
1084: reaction $\gamma d\to pn$ (multiplied
1085: by $s^{11}$) as a function of the c.~m. angle for
1086: $E_{\gamma}=1.6$~GeV and 3.98~GeV (upper and lower parts,
1087: respectively). The experimental data are from Ref. \cite{Holt}.
1088: The bold solid curves are results of calculations using the
1089: phenomenological Regge trajectory for parameter Set G.}
1090: \label{fig:dsg}
1091: \end{center}
1092: \end{figure}
1093:
1094:
1095: \pagebreak
1096: \begin{figure}[dsgb1]
1097: \begin{center}
1098: \leavevmode
1099: \psfig{file=dsgb1.epsi,width=14.cm}
1100: \caption{Differential cross section for the
1101: reaction $\gamma d\to pn$ (multiplied
1102: by $s^{11}$) as a function of the c.~m. angle for
1103: $E_{\gamma}=1.6$~GeV and 3.98~GeV (upper and lower parts,
1104: respectively). The experimental data are from Ref. \cite{Holt}.
1105: The dashed curves are calculated using logarithmic Regge
1106: trajectories with $T_B = 1.5$ and 1.7 GeV$^2$.
1107: The long-dashed curve presents the result
1108: of calculations which take into account the interference of the
1109: isoscalar and isovector parts of the $\gamma d\to pn$ amplitude
1110: (see text).} \label{fig:dsgb1}
1111: \end{center}
1112: \end{figure}
1113: \end{document}
1114: #!/bin/csh -f
1115: # Uuencoded gz-compressed .tar file created by csh script uufiles
1116: # For more info (11/95), see e.g. http://xxx.lanl.gov/faq/uufaq.html
1117: # If you are on a unix machine this file will unpack itself: strip
1118: # any mail header and call resulting file, e.g., figures.uu
1119: # (uudecode ignores these header lines and starts at begin line below)
1120: # Then say csh figures.uu
1121: # or explicitly execute the commands (generally more secure):
1122: # uudecode figures.uu ; gunzip figures.tar.gz ;
1123: # tar -xvf figures.tar
1124: # On some non-unix (e.g. VAX/VMS), first use editor to change filename
1125: # in "begin" line below to figures.tar-gz , then execute
1126: # uudecode figures.uu
1127: # gzip -d figures.tar-gz
1128: # tar -xvf figures.tar
1129: #
1130: uudecode $0
1131: chmod 644 figures.tar.gz
1132: gunzip -c figures.tar.gz | tar -xvf -
1133: rm $0 figures.tar.gz
1134: exit
1135:
1136: