1:
2: \chapter{Transverse Spin in QCD and Transverse Polarized DIS}
3:
4: The spin structure of the proton is one of the most challenging problems in
5: present day particle physics. A large number of theoretical and experimental
6: investigations are going on in this subject. The famous EMC result
7: gave rise to the so called `spin crisis' by
8: indicating that only a small fraction of
9: the proton helicity is carried by the quarks and antiqurks, and so
10: Ellis-Jaffe sum rule is violated. A much more debated and interesting issue
11: is the transverse polarized structure function $g_T$, which can be
12: measured in transverse polarized DIS. The contribution to the cross section
13: in this case is proportional to $g_T$ and this is suppressed by a factor
14: ${1\over Q}$ compared to the leading contribution of $g_1$ in the
15: longitudinally polarized case. So, the structure function $g_T$ is measured
16: less accurately than $g_1$. Also, $g_T$ cannot be expressed as an incoherent
17: sum over on-mass-shell partons like $g_1$. The partons must be interacting
18: in order to contribute to transverse polarized scattering. Due to these
19: reasons, $g_T$ is called a higher twist effect.
20:
21: The literature on transverse polarized structure function $g_T$ or $g_2$
22: ($g_T=g_1+g_2$) is vast and even contradictory and confusing \cite{c7jnp,c7efre}.
23: Early works on $g_2$ include \cite{c7hei}.
24: The discussion of $g_2$ at large $Q^2$ using OPE has been done in \cite{c7sh}.
25: Quark mass plays an important role in
26: transversely polarized scattering (see chapter 4 for
27: references). The recent polarized DIS data has opened up new avenues to
28: explore $g_T$.
29:
30:
31: We analyze the transverse polarized structure function $g_T$ in light-front
32: Hamiltonian QCD. We show that $g_T$ is related to the interaction
33: dependent transverse spin operator in light-front QCD which is the reason
34: for its complexity. In this chapter, we
35: present our analysis of the transverse spin operator and transverse
36: polarized structure function.
37:
38: The plan of this chapter is as follows. In Sec. 7.1, first, we briefly
39: review the complexities associated with the description of the spin of a
40: composite system in a moving frame in the conventional equal time
41: quantization. Then in Sec. 7.2 we give
42: the canonical
43: structure of light-front Poincare algebra. In Sec. 7.3 and 7.4 we introduce
44: the light-front spin operators for massive and massless cases respectively
45: of arbitrary transverse momentum.
46: The
47: explicit form of transverse rotation operators in light-front QCD is derived
48: in Sec. 7.5. The connection of the transverse spin operators with $g_T$ is
49: given in Sec. 7.6.
50: Summary and conclusions are presented in Sec. 7.7.
51: For the sake of completeness and clarity,
52: the explicit form of the kinematical operators and the Hamiltonian in
53: light-front QCD starting from the gauge invariant, symmetric, interaction
54: dependent, energy momentum
55: tensor is derived in Appendix D. A complete discussion of
56: transverse spin operators in free fermion
57: field theory and free massless, spin one boson field theory
58: is presented in detail in Appendices E and F.
59:
60: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
61: \section{The Problem of Spin in Relativistic Quantum Field Theory}
62: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
63:
64: From the early days of quantum field theory, it has been recognized that the
65: issues associated with the spin of a composite system in an arbitrary
66: reference frame are
67: highly complex and non-trivial \cite{c7alfaro}.
68: The familiar Pauli-Lubanski operators readily qualify for spin operators
69: {\it only} in the rest frame of
70: the particle. For a single particle in a moving frame it is known \cite{c7gur}
71: how to construct the appropriate spin operators starting from the
72: Pauli-Lubanski operators.
73: How to construct the spin operators for a composite system in an arbitrary
74: reference frame is a nontrivial problem. In equal-time quantization,
75: the complexities arise
76: from the facts that for a moving composite object, {\it Pauli-Lubanski
77: operators are necessarily interaction dependent} and, further, it is quite
78: difficult \cite{c7os} to separate the center of mass and internal variables which is
79: mandatory in the calculation of spin. Due to these difficulties there has been
80: rarely any attempt to study the spin of a moving composite system in the
81: conventional equal time formulation of even simple field theoretic models,
82: let alone Quantum Chromo Dynamics (QCD).
83:
84: In order to resolve the above mentioned problems and puzzles, we have
85: undertaken an investigation of the spin of a composite
86: system in an arbitrary reference frame in QCD. We have compared and
87: contrasted both the instant form and front form formulations. We emphasize
88: that the interaction
89: dependence of the spin of a composite system in an arbitrary reference frame
90: is not a peculiarity of light-front dynamics, it is a general feature in any
91: formulation of quantum field theory. What is peculiar to light-front
92: dynamics is that one can at most go only to the transverse rest frame of the
93: particle. No frame exists in which $P^+=0$ and one is so to speak $``$always in
94: a moving frame". As a consequence, spin measured in any direction other than
95: that of $P^+$ cannot be separated into orbital and intrinsic parts. This is
96: to be contrasted with the light-front helicity ${\cal J}^3$ which is independent
97: of interactions and further can be separated in to orbital and intrinsic
98: parts. The situation is quite analogous to that of a light-like particle. In
99: this case it is well known that since there is no rest frame, one can
100: uniquely identify the spin of the particle only along the direction of motion
101: since only along this direction one can disentangle rotation from translation
102: for a massless particle. Also, in any direction other than the direction of
103: motion, one cannot separate the angular momentum into orbital and intrinsic
104: parts.
105:
106:
107: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
108: \subsection{Intrinsic Spin in Non-Relativistic Quantum Mechanics}
109: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
110: In the non-relativistic case, the transformation from one inertial frame into
111: another is obtained by a Galelian transformation, which is generated by ten
112: generators, namely, the Hamiltonian $H$, which generates time translation,
113: three momenta ${\bf P}$ which produce translation in space, three
114: angular momenta ${\bf J}$ which produce rotation and the Galelian boost
115: operators ${\bf N}$. Among these, only the Hamiltonian is dynamical, all the
116: remaining generators are kinematical. These generators obey the following
117: commutation relations among themselves:
118: \be
119: \lefteqn{[J_k, J_l]=i\ep_{klm}J_m, ~~~~[P_k, J_l]=i\ep_{klm}P_m, ~~~[N_k, J_l]=
120: i\ep_{klm}N_m}\nonumber\\& &~~~[P_k, P_l]=0, ~~~~~[N_k, N_l]=0,~~~~~~
121: [P_k, N_l]=i\delta_{kl} M \nonumber\\& & [P_k,H]=0,~~~~~~~~~[J_k,H]=0,~~~~~~~~~
122: [N_k,H]=-iP_k,
123: \e
124: where we have used summation convention over repeated indices. Here $M$ is
125: the mass operator.
126: From the above commutation relations, it can be seen that the angular momenta
127: are not translationally invariant. The angular momenta can be written as
128: \be
129: {\bf J}={1\over M}({\bf N} \times {\bf P})+{\bf I}
130: \e
131: where ${1\over M}$ is the inverse of the mass operator and $I$ is called the
132: intrinsic spin \cite{c7jsc}. The intrinsic spin operators are
133: translationally invariant and obey $SU(2)$ commutation relations among
134: themselves. The non-relativistic spin operators are simple due to the fact
135: that the Galelian boost generators are kinematical and
136: commute within themselves.
137: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
138: \subsection{Relativistic Spin Operators in Arbitrary Frame}
139: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
140: A relativistic dynamical system in equal-time formulation is transformed
141: from one frame to another by Poincare transformation, the generators of
142: which are, the relativistic Hamiltonian $H$,
143: three momenta ${\bf P}$, three
144: angular momenta ${\bf J}$ and the boost operators ${\bf K}$. The
145: commutation relations obeyed by these generators are given below:
146: \be
147: \lefteqn{[J_k, J_l]=i\ep_{klm}J_m, ~~~~[P_k, J_l]=i\ep_{klm}P_m, ~~~[K_k, J_l]=
148: i\ep_{klm}K_m}\nonumber\\& &[P_k, P_l]=0, ~~~~~[K_k, K_l]=-i\ep_{klm}J_m,~~ ~~~~
149: [P_k, K_l]=i\delta_{kl}H \nonumber\\& &[P_k,H]=0,~~~~~~~~~[J_k,H]=0,~~~~~~~~~
150: [K_k,H]=-iP_k.
151: \e
152: The crucial difference from the non-relativistic case is that the
153: relativistic boost generators are dynamical and they do not commute with
154: each other. The angular momentum $J$ is not translationally
155: invariant and therefore does not qualify as spin operators.
156: The Casimir invariants of the Lie algebra are
157: \be
158: M^2=P^\mu P_\mu, ~~~~~~~~~W^2=W^\mu W_\mu,
159: \e
160: where
161: \be
162: W^\mu=-{1\over 2} \ep^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma}J_{\nu \rho} P_\sigma
163: \e
164: is the Pauli-Lubanski operator. It is translationally invariant and its
165: components obey the commutation relations:
166: \be
167: [W^\mu, W^\nu]=i\ep^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho}W_\lambda P_\rho.
168: \e
169: For a particle at rest, the 4-momentum is, $P^\mu=(M, 0, 0, 0)$. The
170: commutation relation then becomes
171: \be
172: [W^i, W^j]=i\ep^{ijk} W^k M
173: \e
174: so that if we define three operators, $S^i={W^i\over M}$, then $S^i$ obey
175: $SU(2)$ algebra. Thus, we can define spin in terms of Pauli-Lubanski
176: operators. However, in an arbitrary frame, it is much more complex, because
177: $W^\mu$ are interaction dependent.
178:
179: We consider two classes of representations which are of physical importance:
180: \begin{itemize}
181: {\item Positive time-like representations: $M^{2}>0~~H>0$}
182: {\item Positive light-like representations: $M^{2}=0~~H>0$}.
183: \end{itemize}
184: In either cases we do not demand that the representations be irreducible (this
185: allows us to deal with elementary and composite systems simultaneously).
186: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
187: \subsubsection{A. Positive Time-like Representations}
188: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
189: Starting from the Pauli-Lubanski operator,
190: one can
191: construct an operator ${\bf S}$ such that it is translationally invariant, transforms
192: as a three vector under pure rotations and its components obey $SU(2)$ commutation
193: relations among themselves.
194: \be
195: [S^j,P^\mu]=0, ~~[J^j,S^k]=i \epsilon^{jkl}S^l, ~~[S^j,S^k]=i
196: \epsilon^{jkl}S^l.
197: \e
198: A suitable solution to the above requirements is provided by
199: \be
200: {\bf S}&=&{1\over M}\left[{\bf W}-{{\bf P}W^{0}\over {M+H}}\right]\nonumber\\
201: &=&{\bf J}~{P^0 \over M} - {\bf K} \times {{\bf P}\over M} -
202: {({\bf J} \cdot {\bf P})\over {M+P^0}}{{\bf P}\over M}
203: \e
204: where ${\bf W}$ are the space components of the Pauli-Lubanski
205: operator. $ H $, ${\bf P}$ are equal time Hamiltonian and momentum
206: operators respectively obtained by integrating the energy
207: momentum tensor over a spacelike surface and $ {\bf J}$ and $ {\bf K}$ are
208: the equal time rotation and boost generators respectively, which are obtained by
209: integrating the angular momentum density over a spacelike surface.
210: Since boost ${\bf K}$ is dynamical, {\it all the three components of ${\bf S}$
211: are interaction dependent} in the equal time quantization.
212: Nevertheless, the component of {\bf S} along {\bf P} remains kinematical.
213: We shall see later in this section that, this is to be
214: compared with light-front quantization where {\it the third component of the
215: light-front spin operator ${\cal J}^3$ is kinematical}.
216: This arises from the facts that boost operators are kinematical on the light
217: front, the interaction dependence of light-front spin
218: operators ${\cal J}^i$ arises solely from the rotation operators, and the
219: third component of the rotation operator $J^3$ is kinematical on the light-
220: front.
221:
222:
223: The operators ${\bf S}$ cease to be defined when $M$ tends to zero.
224: The commutation relations among ${\bf P}, {\bf S}$ and $M$ are
225: given by
226: \be
227: [ P^j,S^k ]=0,~~
228: [S^j,S^k]=i \epsilon^{jkl}S^l,~~[S^j,M]=0.\label{c7rel1}
229: \e
230: Since ${\bf P}$ and $M$ stand for the momentum and invariant mass of the system,
231: the above relations make clear that ${\bf S}$ should represent
232: `intrinsic spin' of the system.
233:
234: The invariant $W^{2}$ can be completely expressed in terms of $M$ and ${\bf S}$ as
235: \be
236: W^{2}=-M^{2}{\bf S}^{2}.
237: \e
238: \vskip .2in
239: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
240: {\subsubsection{B. Positive Light-like Representations}
241: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
242: In the massless case, the spin operators do not obey $SU(2)$ algebra.
243: Beginning from the basic generators ${\bf P}$, $\bf J$ and $\bf K$ (here
244: $H=|{\bf P}|$) one has to construct operators $S$, ${\cal T}^1$ and
245: ${\cal T}^2$ such that they commute with four momentum $P^{\mu}$ and amongst
246: themselves satisfy $E(2)$ commutation relations:
247: \begin{equation}
248: \begin{array}{lll}
249: [S,{\cal T}^1]=i{\cal T}^2, & [S,{\cal T}^2]=-i{\cal T}^1, &
250: [{\cal T}^1,{\cal T}^2]=0.
251: \end{array} \end{equation}
252: A suitable solution consistent with the above requirements is:
253: \be
254: S={W^{0}\over \mid{\bf P}\mid }, \nonumber\\
255: {\cal T}^1=W^{1}-P^{1}{(W^{3}+W^{0})\over (\mid {\bf P}\mid+P^{3})},
256: \nonumber\\
257: {\cal T}^2=W^{2}-P^{2}{(W^{3}+W^{0})\over (\mid {\bf P}\mid +P^{3})}.
258: \e
259: Note that here
260: $S$ is the component of angular momentum in the direction of motion.
261: Another point is, $S$ is a scalar
262: under pure spatial rotation, while shows complicated behavior under
263: pure boosts.
264: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
265: \subsubsection{C. Comments}
266: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
267: The spin operators for a single particle in an arbitrary frame can be
268: defined easily in the above way.
269: The generators for a multi-particle relativistic
270: system have been analyzed by several authors \cite{c7os} in the equal-time
271: formalism. The expressions
272: obtained are too complicated to be used in any practical calculations.
273: In order
274: to describe the intrinsic spin of a composite system, one should be able to
275: separate the center of mass motion from the internal motion. Even in free field
276: theory, this turns out to be quite involved (See Ref. \cite{c7os} and references
277: therein). The generators cannot
278: be easily separated into the center of mass and internal variables.
279: Moreover, the derivations have been done neglecting the field theoretical
280: effects such as pair creation and crossing and so are expected to be valid
281: in the relatively low energy region where an expansion in ${v\over c}$ is
282: permissible. Interactions are to be incorporatated by introducing an
283: effective potential which vanish sufficiently rapidly for large distance.
284: On the other hand, in light-front theory, since transverse boosts
285: are simply Galilean boosts, separation of center of mass motion and internal
286: motion is as simple as in non-relativistic theory. (See Appendix G).
287:
288: Next, we discuss the light-front case.
289:
290: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
291: \section{Light-Front Poincare Generators}
292: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
293: The light-front Poincare generators have been introduced in chapter 3.
294: In terms of the gauge invariant, symmetric energy momentum tensor
295: $\Theta^{\mu \nu}$, the four-vector $P^\mu$ and the
296: tensor $M^{\mu \nu}$ are given by
297: \begin{eqnarray}
298: P^\mu &=& {1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \Theta^{+ \mu}, \\
299: M^{\mu \nu} &=& {1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \left [ x^\mu \Theta^{+
300: \nu} - x^\nu \Theta^{+ \mu} \right ]. \label{c7def1}
301: \end{eqnarray}
302: The boost operators are $ M^{+-} = 2 K^3$ and $M^{+i}=E^i$. The rotation
303: operators are $ M^{12}=J^3$ and $ M^{-i} = F^i$. The Hamiltonian $P^-$ and
304: the transverse rotation operators $F^i$ are dynamical (depend on the
305: interaction) while other seven operators are kinematical. The
306: rotation operators obey the $E(2)$-like algebra of two dimensional Euclidean
307: group, namely,
308: \begin{eqnarray}
309: [F^1,F^2]=0, ~ [J^3,F^i] = i \epsilon^{ij} F^j
310: \end{eqnarray}
311: where $\epsilon^{ij}$ is the two-dimensional antisymmetric tensor.
312: The remaining non-zero commutators are:
313: \be
314: \lefteqn{[P^+,K^3]=-iP^+, ~~~~[P^+, F^i]=2iP^i, ~~~[P^i, E^j]=
315: i\delta^{ij}P^+} \nonumber\\& &~~~[P^i, J^3]=i \ep^{ij}P^j, ~~~~~[P^i, F^j]=
316: i \delta^{ij} P^-,~~ ~~~~
317: [K^3, E^i]=iE^i \nonumber\\& &~~~~[K^3, F^i]=-iF^i,~~~~~~~~~[K^3, P^-]=-iP^-,~~~~~~~~~
318: [E^i, J^3]=i\ep^{ij}E^j\nonumber\\& &~~~~[E^i,
319: F^j]=2iK^3\delta^{ij}-2iJ^3\ep^{ij},~~~[E^i, P^j]=-2iP^i.
320: \e
321: Another important point is that, the transverse boost generators $E^i$
322: commute with each other like the Galelian boosts.
323:
324: From the early days of light-front field theory, the complications
325: associated with
326: transverse rotation operators $F^i$
327: have been recognized. They are interaction
328: dependent just like the Hamiltonian. Furthermore, together with the third
329: component of the rotation operator $J^3$, which is kinematical, $F^i$ do
330: not obey the angular momentum algebra. Instead they obey the algebra of
331: two dimensional Euclidean group which is appropriate only for massless
332: particles. For massive particles, one can define transverse spin operators
333: \cite{c7ls78} which together with the third component (helicity) obey the angular
334: momentum algebra. However, they cannot be separated into orbital and spin
335: parts unlike the helicity operator \cite{c7hk}.
336: Most of the studies of the transverse spin operators in light-front field
337: theory, so far, are
338: restricted to free field theory \cite{c7except}.
339: Even in this case the operators have a
340: complicated structure. However, one can
341: write these operators as a
342: sum of orbital and spin parts, which can be achieved via a unitary
343: transformation, the famous Melosh transformation \cite{c7melosh}.
344: In interacting
345: theory, presumably this can be achieved order by order \cite{c7bp} in a suitable
346: expansion parameter
347: which is justifiable only in a weakly coupled theory.
348:
349:
350: Knowledge about
351: transverse rotation operators and transverse spin operators is important
352: for addressing issues concerning Lorentz invariance in
353: light-front theory. Unfortunately,
354: very little is
355: known \cite{c7review} regarding the field theoretic aspects of the
356: interaction dependent spin operators, {\it We emphasize that in a moving
357: frame, the spin
358: operators are interaction dependent irrespective of whether one considers
359: equal-time field theory or light-front field theory}.
360: To the best of our knowledge, in gauge field theory, the canonical
361: structure of spin
362: operators of a composite system in a moving frame has
363: never been studied.
364: In this chapter, we present a systematic investigation of the spin of a
365: composite system in a moving frame
366: in QCD. We refer to our papers and preprints, \cite{c7lett,c7tran1}.
367: We show that, in spite of the complexities,
368: light-front field theory
369: offers a unique opportunity to address the issue of relativistic spin
370: operators in an arbitrary reference frame since boost is kinematical in this
371: formulation.
372:
373:
374: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
375: \section{Transverse Spin Operators}
376: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
377: \subsection{Massive particle}
378: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
379: The Pauli-Lubanski spin operator
380: \begin{eqnarray}
381: W^\mu = - { 1 \over 2} \epsilon^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} M_{\nu \rho}
382: P_\sigma
383: \end{eqnarray}
384: with $ \epsilon^{+-12} = -2$.
385: For a massive particle, the transverse spin operators \cite{c7ls78} ${\cal J}^i$ in
386: light-front theory are given in terms of Poincare generators by
387: \begin{eqnarray}
388: M{\cal J}^1 &=& W^1 - P^1 {\cal J}^3 = { 1 \over 2} F^2 P^+ + K^3 P^2 - { 1
389: \over 2} E^2 P^- - P^1 {\cal J}^3, \label{c7j1}
390: \e
391: \be
392: M{\cal J}^2 &=& W^2 - P^2 {\cal J}^3 = - { 1 \over 2 } F^1 P^+ -K^3 P^1 + { 1 \over 2} E^1 P^- -
393: P^2 {\cal J}^3. \label{c7j2}
394: \end{eqnarray}
395: The first term in Eqs. (\ref{c7j1}) and (\ref{c7j2}) contains both center of
396: mass motion and internal motion and the next three terms in these equations
397: serve to remove the center of mass motion.
398:
399: The helicity operator is given by
400: \begin{eqnarray}
401: {\cal J}^3 &=& {W^+ \over P^+} = J^3 + { 1 \over P^+}(E^1P^2 - E^2 P^1).
402: \end{eqnarray}
403: Here, $J^3$ contain both center of mass motion and internal motion and the
404: other two terms serve to remove the center of mass motion.
405: The operators ${\cal J}^i$ obey the angular momentum commutation relations
406: \begin{eqnarray}
407: \left [ {\cal J}^i, {\cal J}^j \right ] = i \epsilon^{ijk} {\cal J}^k
408: \label{c7j3} .
409: \end{eqnarray}
410: They commute with $P^\mu$.
411: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
412: \subsection{Massless Case}
413: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
414: Again, we start from the Pauli-Lubanski spin operator
415: \begin{eqnarray}
416: W^\mu = - { 1 \over 2} \epsilon^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} M_{\nu \rho } p_\sigma
417: .
418: \end{eqnarray}
419: For the light-like vector $ p^\mu$, usually the collinear choice is
420: made \cite{c7Tung,c7Weinberg}, namely, $p^+ \neq 0$, $
421: p^\perp=0$. Then we get, $ W^-=0$, $ W^+ = J^3 p^+$, $W^1 = { 1 \over 2} F^2
422: p^+$, $ W^2 = - { 1 \over 2} F^1 p^+$.
423:
424: In free field theory, we have explicitly
425: constructed the Poincare generators for a massless spin one particle in
426: $A^+=0$ gauge in Appendix F.
427: Consider the single particle state $ \mid p \lambda \rangle$ with $
428: p^\perp=0$.
429: From the explicit form of the operators, we find that
430: \begin{eqnarray}
431: J^3 \mid p \lambda \rangle &=& \lambda \mid p \lambda \rangle, \nonumber \\
432: F^i \mid p \lambda \rangle && = 0, ~ i=1,2
433: \end{eqnarray}
434: since $ p^\perp=0$.
435:
436: For calculations with composite states (dressed partons, for example) we
437: have to consider light-like particles with arbitrary
438: transverse momenta. Let us try a light like momentum $ P^\mu$ with $ P^\perp
439: \neq 0$, but $ P^- = {(P^\perp)^2 \over P^+}$ so that $P^2 = 0$.
440: Then we get, as in the case of massive particle,
441: \begin{eqnarray}
442: W^+ &=& J^3 P^+ + E^1 P^2 - E^2 P^1 ,\nonumber \\
443: W^1 &=& { 1 \over 2} F^2 P^+ +K^3 P^2 - { 1 \over 2} E^2 P^-,\nonumber \\
444: W^2 &=& - { 1 \over 2} F^1 P^+ - K^3 P^1 + { 1 \over 2} E^1 P^-, \nonumber
445: \\
446: W^- &=& F^2 P^1 - F^1 P^2 - J^3 P^-.
447: \end{eqnarray}
448: Thus even though $W^1$ and $W^2$ do not annihilate the state, we do get
449: $W^\mu W_\mu(={1\over 2}W^+W^- + {1\over 2}W^-W^+ - (W^1)^2 - (W^2)^2)
450: \mid k \lambda \rangle =0$
451: as it should be for a massless particle.
452:
453: Just as in the case of massive particle, we have the helicity operator for
454: the massless particle,
455: \begin{eqnarray}
456: {\cal J}^3 &=& {W^+ \over P^+} = J^3 + { 1 \over P^+}(E^1P^2 - E^2 P^1).
457: \end{eqnarray}
458: In analogy with
459: the transverse spin for massive particles, we define the transverse spin
460: operators for massless particles as
461: \begin{eqnarray}
462: {\cal J}^i = W^i - P^i {\cal J}^3.
463: \end{eqnarray}
464: They do satisfy
465: \begin{eqnarray}
466: {\cal J}^i \mid k \lambda \rangle &=&0, \nonumber \\
467: {\cal J}^3 \mid k \lambda \rangle && = \lambda \mid k \lambda \rangle,
468: \end{eqnarray}
469: where $k$ is an arbitrary momentum.
470: The operators ${\cal J}^i$ and ${\cal J}^3$ obey the $E(2)$-like algebra
471: \begin{eqnarray}
472: \left [{\cal J}^1, {\cal J}^2 \right ] =0, ~
473: \left [{\cal J}^3, {\cal J}^1 \right ] = i {\cal J}^2,~
474: \left [{\cal J}^3, {\cal J}^2 \right ] = -i {\cal J}^1.
475: \end{eqnarray}
476: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
477: \subsection{Comments}
478: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
479: In order to calculate the transverse spin operators, first we need to
480: construct the Poincare generators $P^+$, $P^i$, $P^-$,
481: $K^3$, $E^i$, $J^3$ and
482: $F^i$ in light-front QCD. The explicit form of the operator $J^3$ is given
483: Ref. \cite{c7hk}. The construction of $F^i$ which is algebraically
484: quite involved is carried out in the next section. The construction of the
485: rest of the kinematical operators is given in Appendix D. In this appendix we also present
486: the Hamiltonian in a manifestly Hermitian form.
487:
488: In order to have a physical picture of the complicated situation at hand it
489: is instructive to calculate the spin operator in free
490: field
491: theory. The case of free massive fermion is carried out in Appendix E.
492: In free field theory one can
493: indeed show that (see Appendix E) ${\cal J}^i \mid k \lambda \rangle =
494: { 1 \over 2} \sum_{\lambda'} \sigma^i_{\lambda' \lambda} \mid k \lambda'
495: \rangle$. The case of free massless spin one
496: particle is carried out in Appendix F.
497: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
498: \section{The Transverse Rotation Operator in QCD}
499: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
500: In this section we derive the expressions for interaction dependent
501: transverse rotation operators in light-front QCD starting from the
502: manifestly gauge invariant energy momentum tensor. It is extremely
503: interesting to compare and contrast the situation in the equal time and
504: light-front case.
505: The angular momentum density
506: \begin{eqnarray}
507: {\cal M}^{\alpha \mu \nu} = x^\mu \Theta^{\alpha \nu} - x^\nu
508: \Theta^{\alpha \mu}.
509: \end{eqnarray}
510: In equal time theory, generalized angular momentum
511: \begin{eqnarray}
512: M^{\mu \nu} = \int d^3x {\cal M}^{0 \mu \nu}.
513: \end{eqnarray}
514: The rotation operators are $ J^i = \epsilon^{ijk} M^{jk}$. Thus in a
515: non-gauge theory, all the three components of the rotation operators are
516: manifestly interaction independent. However, as we have seen in the last
517: section, the spin operators $S^i$ for a
518: composite system in
519: a moving frame involves, in addition to $J^i$, the boost operators
520: $K^i = M^{0i}$ which are interaction dependent. {\it Thus all the three
521: components of $S^i$ become interaction dependent.}
522:
523:
524: A gauge invariant separation of the nucleon angular momentum is performed in
525: Ref. \cite{c7ji}. However, as far the spin operator in an arbitrary reference
526: frame is concerned,
527: the analysis of this reference is valid only in the rest frame where spin
528: coincides with total angular momentum operator and in an arbitrary
529: reference frame the need to project out the
530: center of mass motion, which is quite complicated in equal time theory is
531: not emphasized.
532: Moreover, the distinction between the longitudinal and transverse components
533: of the spin is never made.
534: It is crucial to make this distinction since physically
535: the longitudinal and transverse components of the spin carry quite distinct
536: information (as is clear, for example, from the spin of a massless particle).
537: Moreover, even for the third component of the spin of a composite system
538: in a moving frame, there is crucial difference between equal time and light
539: front cases. ${\cal J}^3$
540: (helicity) is interaction independent whereas $S^3$ is interaction
541: dependent in general except when measured along the direction of {\bf P}.
542:
543:
544: In light-front theory, generalized angular momentum
545: \begin{eqnarray}
546: M^{\mu \nu} =
547: { 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp {\cal M}^{+ \mu \nu}.
548: \end{eqnarray}
549: $J^3$ which is related to the helicity is given by
550: \begin{eqnarray}
551: J^3 = M^{12} = { 1
552: \over 2} \int dx^1 d^2 x^\perp [x^1
553: \Theta^{+2} - x^2 \Theta^{+1} ]
554: \end{eqnarray}
555: and is interaction independent.
556: On the other hand, the transverse rotation operators which are related
557: to the transverse spin are given by
558: $$ F^i =M^{-i}= { 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp [ x^- \Theta^{+i} - x^i
559: \Theta^{+-} ] . $$
560: They are interaction dependent {even in a non-gauge theory} since
561: $\Theta^{+-}$ is the Hamiltonian density.
562:
563:
564:
565:
566:
567: In light-front theory we set the gauge $A^+=0$
568: and eliminate the dependent variables $\psi^-$ and $A^-$ using the equations
569: of constraint. In this paper we restrict to the topologically trivial sector
570: of the theory and set the boundary condition $A^i(x^-, x^i) \rightarrow 0 $
571: as $ x^{-,i} \rightarrow \infty$. This completely fixes the gauge and put
572: all surface terms to zero.
573:
574:
575: The transverse rotation operator
576: \begin{eqnarray}
577: F^i = {1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \Big [ x^- \Theta^{+i} - x^i
578: \Theta^{+-} \Big ].
579: \end{eqnarray}
580: The symmetric, gauge invariant energy momentum tensor
581: \begin{eqnarray}
582: \Theta^{\mu \nu} &=& { 1 \over 2} {\overline \psi} \Big [
583: \gamma^\mu i D^\nu + \gamma^\nu i D^\mu \Big ] \psi - F^{\mu \lambda a}
584: F^{\nu a}_{\, \, \lambda}
585: \nonumber\\&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- g^{\mu \nu} \Big [ - { 1 \over 4}
586: (F_{\lambda \sigma a})^2 +
587: {\overline \psi} ( \gamma^\lambda i D_\lambda - m) \psi \Big ],
588: \end{eqnarray}
589: where
590: \begin{eqnarray}
591: i D^\mu &=& {1 \over 2} \st{\lh}{i\pp^\mu} + g A^\mu, \nonumber \\
592: F^{\mu \lambda a} &=& \partial^\mu A^{\lambda a} - \partial^\lambda A^{\mu
593: a} + g f^{abc} A^{\mu b} A^{\lambda c}, \nonumber \\
594: F^{\nu a}_{\, \, \lambda} &=& \partial^\nu A_{\lambda}^a - \partial_\lambda
595: A^{\nu a} + g f^{abc} A^{\nu b} A_\lambda^c.
596: \end{eqnarray}
597: First consider the fermionic part of $ \Theta^{\mu \nu}$:
598: \begin{eqnarray}
599: \Theta^{\mu \nu}_F = { 1 \over 2} {\overline \psi} \Big [ \gamma^\mu i D^\nu
600: + \gamma^\nu i D^\mu \Big ]\psi - g^{\mu \nu } {\overline \psi} (\gamma^\lambda
601: i D_\lambda - m)\psi.
602: \end{eqnarray}
603: The coefficient of $g^{\mu \nu}$ vanishes because of the equation of motion.
604:
605: Explicitly, the contribution to $F^2$ from the fermionic part of
606: $\Theta^{\mu \nu}$ is given by
607: \begin{eqnarray}
608: F^2_F && = { 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \left [ x^- { 1 \over 2}
609: {\overline \psi} (\gamma^+ i D^2 + \gamma^2 i D^+) \psi
610: - x^2 { 1 \over 2}{\overline \psi} (\gamma^+ i D^- + \gamma^- i D^+) \psi
611: \right ], \nonumber \\
612: && = F^2_{F(I)} + F^2_{F(II)},
613: \end{eqnarray}
614: where
615: \begin{eqnarray}
616: F^2_{F(I)}= { 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp x^- \Big [
617: {\psi^+}^\dagger {1 \over 2} \st{\lh}{i\pp^2} \psi^+ + {\psi^+}^\dagger g A^2 \psi^+ +
618: { 1 \over 4} {\overline
619: \psi} \gamma^i \st{\lh}{i\pp^+}
620: \psi \Big ],
621: \end{eqnarray}
622: \begin{eqnarray}
623: F^2_{F(II)}= -{ 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp x^2 \Big [
624: {\psi^+}^\dagger \Big ({1 \over 2} \st{\lh}{i\pp^-} + gA^- \Big ) \psi^+
625: +
626: { 1 \over 4}
627: {\psi^-}^\dagger \gamma^i \st{\lh}{i\pp^+}
628: \psi^- \Big ].
629: \end{eqnarray}
630: We have the equation of constraint
631: \begin{eqnarray}
632: i \partial^+ \psi^- = \big [ \alpha^\perp \cdot ( i \partial^\perp + g
633: A^\perp) + \gamma^0 m \big ] \psi^+ \label{c7eoc}
634: \end{eqnarray}
635: and the equation of motion
636: \begin{eqnarray}
637: i \partial^- \psi^+ = -g A^- \psi^+ + \big [ \alpha^\perp \cdot (i
638: \partial^\perp + g A^\perp) + \gamma^0 m \big]{ 1 \over i \partial^+}
639: \big [ \alpha^\perp \cdot (i
640: \partial^\perp + g A^\perp) + \gamma^0 m \big] \psi^+. \label{c7eom}
641: \end{eqnarray}
642: Using the Eqs. (\ref{c7eoc}) and (\ref{c7eom}) we arrive at free ($g$
643: independent) and
644: interaction ($g$ dependent) parts of $F^2_F$.
645: The free part of $F^2_F$ is given by
646: \begin{eqnarray}
647: F^2_{F(free)} &=& { 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \Bigg \{x^- \Bigg [
648: \xi^\dagger \Big [i \partial^2 \xi\Big] -
649: \Big [i \partial^2 \xi^\dagger\Big ] \xi \Bigg ] \nonumber \\
650: &&~~~~~~ - x^2 \Bigg [ \xi^\dagger \Big [{ - (\partial^\perp)^2 +m^2 \over i
651: \partial^+} \xi \Big ] - \Big [{ - (\partial^\perp)^2 +m^2 \over i
652: \partial^+} \xi^\dagger\Big ] \xi \Bigg ] \nonumber \\
653: && ~~~~~~+ \Bigg [ \xi^\dagger \Big [ \sigma^3 \partial^1 + i \partial^2
654: \Big]{ 1 \over
655: \partial^+} \xi + \Big [ { 1 \over \partial^+} (\partial^1 \xi^\dagger \sigma^3 -
656: i \partial^2 \xi^\dagger) \Big ] \xi \Bigg ] \nonumber \\
657: &&~~~~~~ + m \Bigg [ \xi^\dagger \Big [{ \sigma^1 \over i \partial^+}
658: \xi\Big ] -
659: \Big [{ 1 \over i \partial^+} \xi^\dagger\sigma^1\Big ] \xi \Bigg ]
660: \Bigg \}.
661: \end{eqnarray}
662: We have introduced the two-component field $\xi$,
663: \begin{eqnarray} \psi^+ =
664: \left [ \begin{array}{c} \xi \\
665: 0 \end{array} \right ].
666: \end{eqnarray}
667: The interaction dependent part of $F^2_{F(I)}$ is
668: \begin{eqnarray}
669: F^2_{F(I)int} &=& g \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp x^- \xi^\dagger A^2 \xi \nonumber
670: \\
671: && ~~~~+ { 1 \over 4} g \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \Big [ \xi^\dagger { 1 \over
672: \partial^+}[(-i \sigma^3 A^1 + A^2)\xi] \nonumber\\&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
673: + { 1 \over \partial^+}
674: [ \xi^\dagger (i \sigma^3 A^1 + A^2)]\xi \Big ].
675: \end{eqnarray}
676:
677: The interaction dependent part of $F^2_{F(II)}$ is
678: \begin{eqnarray}
679: F^2_{F(II)int} = { 1 \over 4} g \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \Big
680: [ \xi^\dagger { 1 \over
681: \partial^+}[(-i \sigma^3 A^1 + A^2)\xi] + { 1 \over \partial^+}
682: [ \xi^\dagger (i \sigma^3 A^1 + A^2)]\xi \Big ] \nonumber \\
683: - { 1 \over 2} g \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp x^2 \Bigg [
684: {\pp^\p\over {\pp^+}} [ \xi^\dagger ({\tilde \s}^\p \cdot A^\p) ] {\tilde \s}^\p
685: \xi + \xi^\dagger ({\tilde \s}^\p \cdot A^\p) {1\over {\pp^+}} ({\tilde
686: \s}^\p \cdot \pp^\p) \xi \nonumber\\ ~~~~~ + ({ \pp^\p \over {\pp^+}}
687: \xi^\dagger) {\tilde \s}^\p ( { \tilde \s}^\p \cdot A^\p) \xi + \xi^\dagger
688: {1\over {\pp^+}} ({\tilde \s}^\p \cdot \pp^\p) ( {\tilde \s}^\p \cdot
689: A^\p) \xi \nonumber\\ ~~~~~~ -m {1\over {\pp^+}} [ \xi^\dagger ({\tilde
690: \s}^\p \cdot A^\p) ] \xi + m \xi^\dagger ( {\tilde \s}^\p \cdot A^\p){1\over
691: {\pp^+}} \xi
692: \nonumber\\~~~~~~~~~~ + m ( {1\over {\pp^+}} \xi^\dagger) ({\tilde \s}^\p
693: \cdot A^\p) \xi - m \xi^\dagger {1\over {\pp^+}} [( {\tilde \s}^\p \cdot
694: A^\p) \xi] \Bigg ] \nonumber\\
695: ~~~~- {1 \over 2 } g^2 \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp x^2 \Bigg [
696: \xi^\dagger {\tilde \sigma}^\perp \cdot A^\perp { 1 \over i \partial^+}
697: {\tilde \sigma}^\perp \cdot (A^\perp \xi)
698: - { 1 \over i \partial^+} (\xi^\dagger {\tilde \sigma}^\perp \cdot A^\perp)
699: {\tilde \sigma}^\perp \cdot A^\perp \xi \Bigg ].
700: \end{eqnarray}
701: We have introduced $ {\tilde \sigma}^1 = \sigma^2$ and $ {\tilde
702: \sigma}^2 = - \sigma^1$.
703:
704:
705: Next consider the gluonic part of the operator $F^2$:
706: \begin{eqnarray}
707: F^2_g = { 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \Big [ x^- \Theta^{+2}_g - x^2
708: \Theta^{+-}_g \Big ],
709: \end{eqnarray}
710: where
711: \begin{eqnarray}
712: \Theta^{+2}_g &=& - F^{+ \lambda a} F^{2a}_{\, \, \lambda}, \nonumber \\
713: \Theta^{+-}_g &=& - F^{+\lambda a} F^{- a }_{\, \, \lambda} + { 1 \over 4}
714: g^{+-}(F_{\lambda \sigma a})^2.
715: \end{eqnarray}
716: Using the constraint equation
717: \begin{eqnarray}
718: { 1 \over 2} \partial^+ A^{-a} = \partial^i A^{ia} + g f^{abc} { 1 \over
719: \partial^+}(A^{ib} \partial^+A^{ic}) + 2 g { 1 \over \partial^+} \Big (
720: \xi^\dagger T^a \xi \Big ),
721: \end{eqnarray}
722: we arrive at
723: \begin{eqnarray}
724: F^2_g = F^2_{g(free)} + F^2_{g(int)}
725: \end{eqnarray}
726: where
727: \begin{eqnarray}
728: F^2_{g(free)} &=& { 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \Bigg \{ x^- \Big (
729: A^{ja}\partial^+\partial^j A^{2a} - A^{2a}\partial^+ \partial^j A^{ja}+
730: A^{ja}\partial^+\partial^2 A^{ja}\Big ) \nonumber \\
731: && ~~~~~~~~~~~ -x^2 \Big ( A^{ka}(\partial^j)^2 A^{ka} \Big ) \Bigg
732: \}
733: \nonumber \\
734: && ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- 2\int dx^- d^2 x^\perp A^{2a} \partial^1 A^{1a}.
735: \end{eqnarray}
736: The interaction part
737: \begin{eqnarray}
738: F^2_{g(int)} &=& { 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp x^- \Bigg \{
739: gf^{abc} \partial^+ A^{ia} A^{2b} A^{ic} \nonumber \\
740: &&~~~~ + g\Big ( f^{abc} { 1 \over \partial^+}(A^{ib}
741: \partial^+ A^{ic}) + 2{
742: 1 \over \partial^+} (\xi^\dagger T^a \xi) \Big ) \partial^+ A^{2a} \Bigg \}
743: \nonumber \\
744: &&~~ - {1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp x^2 \Bigg \{
745: 2g f^{abc} \partial^i A^{ja} A^{ib} A^{jc} + {g^2 \over 2} f^{abc} f^{ade}
746: A^{ib} A^{jc} A^{id} A^{je} \nonumber \\
747: && ~~~~ + 2g \partial^i A^{ia} { 1 \over \partial^+}
748: \Big ( f^{abc} A^{jb} \partial^+ A^{jc} + 2 \xi^\dagger T^a \xi \Big )
749: \nonumber \\
750: && ~~~~ + g^2 \Big ( f^{abc} { 1\over \partial^+} (A^{ib}\partial^{+} A^{ic})
751: +2 { 1 \over \partial^+} \xi^\dagger T^a \xi \Big
752: )\nonumber\\&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
753: \Big ( f^{ade} { 1\over \partial^+} (A^{jd}\partial^{+} A^{je})
754: + 2{ 1 \over \partial^+} \xi^\dagger T^a \xi \Big ) \Bigg \}.
755: \end{eqnarray}
756: So the full transverse rotation operator in QCD can be written as
757: \begin{eqnarray}
758: F^2 = F^2_{I} + F^2_{II} + F^2_{III},
759: \end{eqnarray}
760: where
761: \begin{eqnarray}
762: F^2_{I}&=& {1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p [ x^- {\cal P}^2_0 - x^2 ({\cal H}_0 +
763: {\cal V}) ], \\
764: F^2_{II} &=&
765: {1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p \Bigg [\xi^\dagger \Big [ \sigma^3 \partial^1 + i \partial^2
766: \Big]{ 1 \over
767: \partial^+} \xi + \Big [ { 1 \over \partial^+} (\partial^1 \xi^\dagger \sigma^3 -
768: i \partial^2 \xi^\dagger) \Big ] \xi \Bigg ] \nonumber \\
769: &&~~~~~~ + {1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p m \Bigg [ \xi^\dagger \Big [{ \sigma^1 \over i \partial^+}
770: \xi\Big ] -
771: \Big [{ 1 \over i \partial^+} \xi^\dagger\sigma^1\Big ] \xi \Bigg ]
772: \nonumber \\
773: && ~~+ {1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p g \Bigg [ \xi^\dagger { 1 \over
774: \partial^+}[(-i \sigma^3 A^1 + A^2)\xi] + { 1 \over \partial^+}
775: [ \xi^\dagger (i \sigma^3 A^1 + A^2)]\xi \Bigg ], \\
776: F^2_{III}&=&
777: - \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp 2(\partial^1 A^{1})A^2 \nonumber \\
778: &&~~-{1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p g {4\over {\pp^+}} (\xi^\dagger T^a
779: \xi) A^{2a} \nonumber\\&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- {1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p g f^{abc} {2\over
780: {\pp^+}} (
781: A^{ib} \pp^+ A^{ic} ) A^{2a}
782: \end{eqnarray}
783: where $ {\cal P}^i_0$ is the free momentum density, $ {\cal H}_o$ is the
784: free Hamiltonian density and ${\cal V}$ are the interaction terms in the
785: Hamiltonian in manifestly Hermitian form. The operators $F^2_{II}$ and $F^2_{III}$
786: whose integrands do not
787: explicitly depend upon coordinates arise from the fermionic and bosonic
788: parts respectively of the gauge invariant, symmetric, energy momentum tensor
789: in QCD.
790: From Eq. (\ref{c7j1}) in Sec. 7.3 it follows that the transverse spin
791: operators ${\cal J}^i$, ($i=1,2$) can also be written as the sum of three
792: parts, ${\cal J}^i_{I}$ whose integrand
793: has explicit coordinate dependence, ${\cal
794: J}^i_{II}$ which arises from the fermionic part, and ${\cal J}^i_{III}$ which
795: arises from the bosonic part of the energy momentum tensor.
796: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
797: \section{Connection with Transverse Polarized Scattering}
798: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
799:
800: From the phenomenological point of view, the issue of transverse spin has
801: become very important in high energy physics thanks to recent
802: experimental advances \cite{c7expt}. Since transverse spin for a free massless
803: gluon is identically zero, transverse spin measurements for gluonic
804: observables directly probe the long distance, nonperturbative features of
805: QCD. Analogous to longitudinally polarized scattering, where
806: quark helicity carries roughly only 25 \% of the proton helicity,
807: one may ask what is the
808: situation in transversely polarized scattering.
809: In particular can one relate the operators appearing in the transverse spin
810: to the integrals of structure functions appearing in transverse polarized
811: scattering?
812:
813: In the previous section, we have shown that, though the transverse spin
814: operators cannot be separated into an orbital and a spin part, one can still
815: define a decomposition of it into three different parts.
816: In this section, we establish the physical relevance of this decomposition by
817: exploring the connection between hadron expectation values of the
818: transverse spin operators and the
819: quark and gluon distribution functions that
820: appear in transversely polarized deep inelastic scattering.
821:
822:
823: It is known that the transverse polarized distribution function in deep
824: inelastic scattering is
825: given by (we have taken transverse polarization along the $x$-axis)
826: \begin{eqnarray}
827: g_T(x) &=& {1\over 8\pi M} \int d\eta
828: e^{-i\eta x}\times
829: \langle PS^1|\overline{
830: \psi}(\eta) \Big(\gamma^1 -{P^1\over P^+}
831: \gamma^+ \Big)\gamma_5 \psi(0) +~ h.c. |PS^1 \rangle
832: \, ,
833: \end{eqnarray}
834: where $P^\mu$ and
835: $S^\mu$ are the four momentum and the polarization vector of the target.
836: Using the constraint equation for $\psi^-$, we arrive at
837: \begin{eqnarray}
838: \int_{-\infty}^{+ \infty} dx g_T(x) &=&
839: \int_{-\infty}^{+ \infty} dx (g_{T(I)}(x) + g_{T(II)}(x))
840: \end{eqnarray}
841: \begin{eqnarray}
842: \int_{-\infty}^{+ \infty} dx g_{T(I)}(x) & =&
843: { 1 \over 2 M} \langle P S^1 \mid
844: \Bigg [ \xi^\dagger \Big [ \sigma^3 \partial^1 + i \partial^2 \Big ] { 1 \over
845: \partial^+} \xi +
846: {\partial^1 \over \partial^+}(\xi^\dagger) \sigma^3 \xi - i
847: {\partial^2 \over \partial^+} (\xi^\dagger) \xi
848: \nonumber\\&& + m \xi^\dagger \sigma^1 { 1 \over i \partial^+}(\xi) - m { 1 \over
849: i \partial^+} (\xi^\dagger) \sigma^1 \xi
850: +g
851: \Big
852: [ \xi^\dagger { 1 \over
853: \partial^+}[(-i \sigma^3 A^1 + A^2)\xi]\nonumber\\&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~
854: + { 1 \over \partial^+}
855: [ \xi^\dagger (i \sigma^3 A^1 + A^2)]\xi \Big ]
856: \Bigg] \mid P S^1 \rangle .
857: \end{eqnarray}
858: Thus the integral of $g_{T(I)}(x)$ is directly proportional to the nucleon
859: expectation value of $F^2_{II}$. Both $g_{T(I)}$ and $F^2_{II}$ depend on
860: the center of mass motion whereas both $g_T$ and ${\cal J}^i$ are
861: independent of the center of mass motion. The removal of the center of mass
862: motion from $g_{T(I)}$ is achieved by $g_{T(II)}$. We have
863: \begin{eqnarray}
864: \int_{-\infty}^{+ \infty} dx g_{T(II)}(x)=
865: { 1 \over M} { P^1 \over P^+}\langle P S^1 \mid\xi^\dagger
866: \sigma^3 \xi \mid P S^1 \rangle.
867: \end{eqnarray}
868: The integral of $g_{T(II)}(x)$ is directly proportional to the nucleon
869: expectation value of the quark intrinsic helicity operator
870: \begin{eqnarray}
871: J^3_{q(i)} = { 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \xi^\dagger \sigma^3 \xi.
872: \end{eqnarray}
873:
874:
875: Consider the polarized gluon distribution function that appears in
876: transversely polarized scattering (see Ref. \cite{c7Ji})
877: \begin{eqnarray}
878: G_T(x) = { 1 \over 8 \pi x (P^+)^2} { 1 \over ({S^i}^2)} i \epsilon^{\mu \nu
879: \alpha \beta} S_\alpha P_\beta
880: \int d \eta e^{- i \eta x }
881: \langle P S^\perp \mid F^{+a}_{~~ \mu} (\eta) F^{+a}_{~~\nu}(0) \mid
882: P S^\perp \rangle.
883: \end{eqnarray}
884: Here $S^\mu$ is the polarization vector,
885: \be
886: S^\mu={1\over 2}\overline u \gamma^\mu \gamma^5 u
887: \e
888: where $u$ is the Dirac spinor. For longitudinal polarization, the normalized
889: spinors are \cite{c7ped}
890: \be
891: u_{\uparrow} (P) = {1\over \sqrt {2P^+}}\left (\begin{array}{c}P^++M\\P^1+iP^2\\
892: P^+-M\\P^1+iP^2\end{array}\right),~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
893: u_{\downarrow} (P) = {1\over \sqrt {2P^+}}
894: \left (\begin{array}{c}-P^1+iP^2\\P^++M\\
895: P^1-iP^2\\-P^++M\end{array}\right).
896: \e
897: These give $S^+=P^+$, $S^\perp=0$.
898: For transverse polarization (along $x$ direction), the normalized spinors
899: are
900: \be
901: u_{\uparrow} (P) = {1\over \sqrt {2P^+}}\left (\begin{array}{c}M+P^+-iP^2\\
902: -P^1\\
903: P^1\\-M+P^++iP^2\end{array}\right),~
904: u_{\downarrow} (P) = {1\over \sqrt {2P^+}}
905: \left (\begin{array}{c}-M+P^+-iP^2\\-P^1\\
906: P^1\\M+P^++iP^2\end{array}\right).
907: \e
908: Using these, we get $S^+=0$,
909: $S^2=0$, $S^1=M$, $ S^-=2 {P^1 \over P^+}M$.
910:
911: For a transversely polarized nucleon, $F^+_{~~ -}=0$.
912: Since for $ \alpha, \mu , \nu =- $, the contribution is automatically zero,
913: $ \beta = -$.
914: Further, let us pick, without loss of generality, the transverse
915: polarization along the $ x $ axis.
916: Thus $\alpha$ is
917: forced to be $1$ or $+$.
918: Then
919: \begin{eqnarray}
920: G_T(x) = G_{T(I)}(x) + G_{T(II)}(x)
921: \end{eqnarray}
922: where
923: \begin{eqnarray}
924: G_{T(I)}(x) = { i \over 8 \pi x MP^+}
925: \int d \eta e^{-i \eta x}
926: \langle P S^1 \mid F^{+a}_{~~ 2} (\eta) F^{+a}_{~~ +}(0) -
927: F^{+a}_{~~
928: +}(\eta) F^{+a}_{~~ 2}(0) \mid P S^1 \rangle,
929: \end{eqnarray}
930: and
931: \begin{eqnarray}
932: G_{T(II)}(x) &=& -
933: { i \over 16 \pi x P^+M^2} S^- \int d \eta
934: e^{-i \eta x}
935: \langle P S^1 \mid F^{+a}_{~~1}(\eta) F^{+a}_{~~2}(0)
936: \nonumber\\&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-
937: F^{+a}_{~~2}(\eta) F^{+a}_{~~1}(0) \mid P S^1 \rangle.
938: \end{eqnarray}
939: We get
940: \begin{eqnarray}
941: \int_{ - \infty }^{+ \infty} dx G_{T(I)}(x)=
942: { 1 \over 2 M} \langle P S^1
943: \mid
944: A^{2a}(0) { 1 \over 2} \partial^+ A^{-a}(0) \mid P S^1 \rangle.
945: \end{eqnarray}
946: From the constraint equation,
947: we explicitly see that the operator structure of the integral of
948: $G_{T(I)}$ is similar to $F^2_{III}$.
949:
950:
951: We also have
952: \begin{eqnarray}
953: \int_{- \infty}^{\infty} dx G_{T(II)}(x) =
954: { 1 \over 4 M}{P^1 \over P^+}
955: \langle P S^1 \mid \left
956: (A^a_1 \partial^+ A_2^a - A^a_2 \partial^+ A_1^a \right )
957: \mid P S^1 \rangle .
958: \end{eqnarray}
959: Thus the integral of $G_{T(II)}(x)$ is proportional to the
960: nucleon expectation value of the
961: gluon intrinsic helicity operator
962: \begin{eqnarray}
963: J^3_{g(i)} = { 1 \over 2} \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp \left [
964: A^a_1 \partial^+ A^a_2 - A^a_2 \partial^+ A^a_1 \right ].
965: \end{eqnarray}
966: Thus, provided the interchange of the order of
967: integrations is legal, we have shown that a direct relation exists
968: between the
969: coordinate independent part of ${\cal J}^i$ which arises from the gauge
970: invariant fermionic and gluonic parts of the symmetric
971: energy momentum tensor and the
972: integrals of the quark and gluon distribution functions $g_T$ and $G_T$ that
973: appear in polarized scattering.
974:
975:
976:
977: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
978: \section{Summary}
979: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
980:
981: In this chapter, we have investigated the transverse spin operator in QCD
982: and showed its connection with the transverse polarized structure function
983: $g_T$. In equal
984: time quantization, one encounters two major difficulties in the description
985: of the spin of a composite system in an arbitrary reference frame. They are
986: 1) the complicated interaction dependence arising from dynamical boost
987: operators and 2) the
988: difficulty in the separation of center of mass motion from the internal
989: motion. Due to these severe difficulties, there have been hardly any attempt
990: to study spin operators of a moving composite system in the conventional
991: equal time formulation of quantum field theory.
992:
993: In light-front theory, on the other hand, the longitudinal spin
994: operator (light-front helicity) is interaction independent and the
995: interaction dependence of transverse spin operators arises solely from that
996: of transverse rotation operators. Moreover, in this case the separation of
997: center of mass motion from internal motion is trivial since light-front
998: transverse boosts are simple Galilean boosts.
999:
1000: We have investigated the case of transverse spin operators for both
1001: massive and massless particles. We have introduced
1002: the transverse spin operators for massless particles with arbitrary
1003: transverse momentum. This is done for the
1004: first time in light-front field theory.
1005: To provide physical intuition for transverse spin
1006: operators which have a complicated structure in interaction theory,
1007: we have provided the explicit form of these operators in Fock space
1008: basis for both free fermion field theory and free massless spin
1009: one field theory in the appendix.
1010:
1011: In QCD, our starting point is the formula for transverse rotation operators
1012: expressed as the integral of generalized angular
1013: momentum density given in terms of gauge invariant, symmetric, energy
1014: momentum tensor. We have emphasized the differences between spin operators
1015: in field theory in equal time and light-front quantization schemes.
1016:
1017: Appropriate to light-front quantization, we choose the
1018: light-front gauge.
1019: We use the constraint equations for $\psi^-$ and $A^-$ to eliminate them in
1020: favor of dynamical degrees of freedom.
1021: In this initial study, we restrict to topologically
1022: trivial sector of QCD and set the requirement that the transverse gauge
1023: fields vanish as $x^{-,i} \rightarrow \infty$. This eliminates the
1024: surface terms and completely fixes the gauge.
1025: In the gauge fixed theory we found that the transverse rotation operators
1026: can be decomposed as the sum of three distinct terms: $F^i_{I}$ which has
1027: explicit coordinate dependence in its integrand, and $F^i_{II}$ and $F^i_{III}$ which have no
1028: explicit coordinate dependence in their integrand.
1029: Further, $F^i_{II}$ and $F^i_{III}$ arise
1030: from the fermionic and bosonic parts of the energy momentum tensor.
1031: Since transverse spin is responsible for the helicity flip of the nucleon in
1032: light-front theory, we now have identified the complete set of
1033: operators responsible for the helicity flip of the nucleon.
1034:
1035:
1036: Our construction and decomposition of the transverse spin operators in QCD also
1037: have important phenomenological consequences. We have
1038: shown \cite{c7lett} that nucleon expectation values of $F^i_{II}$ and
1039: $F^i_{III}$ are directly related to the integrals of quark and gluon
1040: distribution functions that appear in transversely polarized deep inelastic
1041: scattering.
1042: After the experimental discovery of the so-called spin crisis, the question
1043: of the sharing of nucleon helicity among its constituents has become an
1044: active research area. On the theoretical side, the first step involves the
1045: identification of the complete set of operators contributing to nucleon
1046: helicity. In this work, we have made this identification in
1047: the case of transverse spin. We have explicitly shown that the operators
1048: involved in the case of the helicity and transverse spin are very
1049: different. Because of their interaction dependence, operators contributing
1050: to transverse spin are more interesting from the theoretical point of view
1051: since they provide valuable information on the non-perturbative
1052: structure of the hadron.
1053:
1054:
1055: It is extremely interesting to contrast the
1056: cases of longitudinal and transverse spin operators
1057: in light-front field theory. In the case of longitudinal spin operator
1058: (light-front helicity), in the gauge fixed theory, the operator is
1059: interaction independent and can be separated into orbital and spin parts for
1060: quarks and gluons. It is known for a long time that the transverse spin
1061: operators in
1062: light-front field theory cannot be separated into orbital and spin parts
1063: except in the trivial case of free field theory.
1064: We have shown that, in spite of the complexities,
1065: a physically interesting separation is indeed
1066: possible for the transverse spin operators which is quite different from
1067: the separation into orbital and spin parts in the rest frame familiar in the
1068: equal time picture.
1069:
1070: In short, in this chapter we have explored in detail the theoretical aspects of spin
1071: operators in quantum field theory in the context of QCD and their
1072: consequences.
1073: It is
1074: interesting to establish a transverse spin sum rule in analogy to the
1075: helicity sum rule and explore its phenomenological consequences.
1076: Since transverse rotational symmetry is not manifest in light-front theory
1077: a study of these operators is essential for questions regarding Lorentz invariance
1078: in the theory \cite{c7glazek}.
1079: An important issue in the case of transverse spin operators concerns
1080: renormalization. Since they are interaction dependent, they will acquire
1081: divergences in perturbation theory just like the Hamiltonian. It is of
1082: interest to find the physical meaning of these divergences and their
1083: renormalization. We address these issues in the next chapter
1084: by computing the
1085: expectation value of the transverse spin operators in a dressed quark state.
1086:
1087:
1088: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1089: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1090:
1091: \bibitem{c7jnp} R. L. Jaffe, Comments. Nucl. Part. Phys. Vol 19, No. 5, 239
1092: (1900) and references therein.
1093:
1094: \bibitem{c7efre} M. Anselmino, A. Efremov, E. Leader, Phys. Rept. {\bf 261}, 1
1095: (1995).
1096:
1097: \bibitem{c7hei}R. L. Heiman, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B64}, 429 (1973).
1098:
1099: \bibitem{c7sh} S. Wandzura, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B122}, 412 (1977); E. V. Shuryak and A. I Vainshtein, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B201}, 141
1100: (1982); R. L. Jaffe and M. Soldate, Phys. Lett. {\bf B105}, 467
1101: (1981); Phys. Rev. {\bf D26}, 49 (1982).
1102:
1103: \bibitem{c7alfaro} V. de Alfaro, S. Fubini, G. Furlan, and G. Rossetti, {\it
1104: Currents in Hadron Physics} (North-Holland, Amsterdam, (1973)).
1105:
1106:
1107: \bibitem{c7gur} See, for example, F. Gursey in {\it High Energy Physics},
1108: C. DeWitt \& R. Omnes (eds.)
1109: (Gordon \& Breach Science Publishers, (1965)).
1110:
1111: \bibitem{c7os} See, for example, B. Bakamjian and
1112: L. H. Thomas, Phys. Rev. {\bf 92} 1300 (1955);
1113: H. Osborn, Phys. Rev. {\bf 176} 1514 (1968).
1114:
1115: \bibitem{c7jsc} J. S. Schwinger, {\it Particles, Sources and Fields, Vol 1},
1116: (Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., California (1989)),
1117: chapter 1; E.C.G. Sudarshan and N. Mukunda {\it Classical Dynamics: A Modern
1118: Perspective} (John Wiley \& Sons, New York (1974)); J. S. Lomont and H.
1119: E. Moses, Jour. of Math. Phys {\bf 3} 405 (1962).
1120:
1121:
1122: \bibitem{c7ls78}
1123: K. Bardakci and M. B. Halpern, Phys. Rev. {\bf 176}, 1686 (1968);
1124: D. E. Soper, {\it Field Theories
1125: in the Infinite Momentum Frame}, Ph. D. Thesis, Stanford University, (1971),
1126: SLAC-137;
1127: H. Leutwyler and J. Stern, Ann. Phy. {\bf 112}, 94 (1978).
1128:
1129: \bibitem{c7hk} A. Harindranath and R. Kundu, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 59},
1130: 116013 (1999).
1131:
1132:
1133: \bibitem{c7except} For attempts to incorporate interactions, see for example,
1134: E. Eichten, F. Feinberg, and J.F. Willemsen, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 8}, 1204
1135: (1973); R. Carlitz and W.K. Tung, Phys.
1136: Rev. D {\bf 13}, 3446 (1976).
1137:
1138:
1139: \bibitem{c7melosh} H.J. Melosh, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 9}, 1095 (1974).
1140:
1141: \bibitem{c7bp} M. Brisudova and R.J. Perry, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 54}, 6453
1142: (1996).
1143:
1144: \bibitem{c7review} S. J. Brodsky, H.C. Pauli, and S. S. Pinsky, Phys. Rep.
1145: {\bf 301}, 299 (1998).
1146:
1147: \bibitem{c7lett} A. Harindranath, A. Mukherjee and R. Ratabole,
1148: Phys. Lett. {\bf B476}, 471 (2000).
1149:
1150: \bibitem{c7tran1} A. Harindranath, A. Mukherjee and R. Ratabole,
1151: hep-th/0004192.
1152:
1153: \bibitem{c7Tung} Wu Ki Tung, {\it Group Theory in Physics} (World
1154: Scientific, Singapore (1985)).
1155:
1156:
1157: \bibitem{c7Weinberg} S. Weinberg, {\it Quantum Theory of Fields, Vol. I,}
1158: (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995)).
1159:
1160: \bibitem{c7ji} X. Ji, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 78} 610 (1997).
1161:
1162:
1163: \bibitem{c7expt} D. Adams {\it et al.}, Phys. Lett. {\bf B336}, 125
1164: (1994); K. Abe {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 76}, 587
1165: (1996); P.L. Anthony {\it et al.}, SLAC-PUB-7983, January 1999,
1166: hep-ex/9901006.
1167:
1168: \bibitem{c7Ji} X. Ji, Phys. Lett. {\bf B289} 137 (1992).
1169:
1170: \bibitem{c7ped} See A. Harindranath, {\it An Introduction to Light-Front
1171: Dynamics for Pedestrians} in Light Front Quantization and Non-perturbative
1172: QCD, J. P. Vary and F. Woltz (ed.); published by International Institute of
1173: Theoretical and Applied Physics, Ames, Iowa, USA (1997).
1174:
1175: \bibitem{c7glazek} T. Maslowski and S. D. Glazek,
1176: {\it Construction of the Effective Poincare Algebra}, hep-th/9906140.
1177:
1178: \end{thebibliography}
1179:
1180: