1: \chapter{Transverse Spin in Light-Front QCD: Radiative Corrections}
2: In this chapter, we continue our investigation of the transverse spin
3: operators in QCD.
4: We have shown in chapter 7 that there exists a physically
5: interesting separation of the transverse spin operators into a coordinate
6: dependent part and two coordinate independent parts.
7: We have also shown that the
8: transverse spin operators are manifestly interaction dependent. They will
9: acquire divergences in perturbation theory just like the Hamiltonian and it
10: is important to find the physical meaning of the divergences and their
11: renormalization.
12:
13: In light-front QCD
14: Hamiltonian, quark mass appears as $m^2$ and $m$ terms, $m^2$ in the
15: free helicity non-flip part of the Hamiltonian and $m$ in the
16: interaction dependent helicity flip part of the Hamiltonian. It is known
17: that $m^2$ and $m$ renormalize differently. $m^2$ and $m$ also appear
18: in ${\cal J}^i$.
19: Do these terms require new counterterms in addition to those
20: necessary to renormalize the Hamiltonian?
21:
22: Besides renormalization, there is another important issue regarding the
23: transverse spin operators.
24: Recently it was shown that \cite{c8hk}, starting from the manifestly gauge
25: invariant
26: symmetric energy momentum tensor, in light-front QCD (the gauge $A^+=0$ and
27: light-front variables), after the elimination of constrained variables,
28: ${\cal J}^3$ becomes explicitly interaction independent and can be separated
29: into quark and gluon orbital and spin operators. Thus one can write down a
30: helicity sum rule which has a clear physical meaning. The orbital and
31: intrinsic parts of the light-front helicity operator have also been analyzed
32: recently in \cite{c8ang}. Even though ${\cal
33: J}^i$ cannot be separated into orbital and spin parts and they are
34: interaction dependent, one can still ask whether one can identify distinct
35: operator structures in ${\cal J}^i$ and whether one can propose a physically
36: interesting sum rule. In chapter 7, we have seen that, in the gauge
37: $A^+=0$, by eliminating the constrained variables, one can decompose ${\cal
38: J}$ into three parts,
39: ${\cal J}^i= {\cal J}^i_I + {\cal J}^i_{II} + {\cal J}^i_{III}$ where only
40: ${\cal J}^i_{I}$ has explicit coordinate ($x^-, x^i$) dependence in its
41: integrand. The operators ${\cal J}^i_{II}$ and ${\cal J}^i_{III}$ arise from
42: the fermionic and bosonic parts respectively of the gauge invariant energy
43: momentum tensor. We have also shown its connection with transversely
44: polarized scattering. One has to investigate whether this decomposition
45: is protected by radiative corrections.
46:
47: In this chapter, we explore the theoretical consequences of the decomposition of
48: ${\cal J}^i$. We compare and contrast the
49: consequences of this decomposition and the corresponding decomposition of
50: the helicity operator into orbital and spin parts.
51: Next we address the issue of radiative corrections by
52: carrying out the calculation of the transverse spin of a dressed quark in
53: pQCD in the old-fashioned Hamiltonian formalism. To the best of our
54: knowledge, this is for the first time that such a calculation has been
55: performed in quantum field theory. This calculation is
56: facilitated by the fact that boost is kinematical in the light-front
57: formalism. Thus we are able to isolate the internal motion which is only
58: physically relevant from the spurious center of mass motion. We carry out the
59: calculations in a reference frame with arbitrary transverse momentum
60: $P^\perp$ and explicitly verify the frame independence of our results.
61: We find that
62: because of cancellation between various interaction independent and dependent
63: operator matrix elements, only one counterterm is needed. We establish the
64: fact the mass counterterm for the renormalization of ${\cal J}^i$ is the
65: same mass counterterm required for the linear mass term appearing in
66: the interaction dependent helicity flip vertex in QCD. It is important to
67: mention that the divergence structure and renormalization in light-front
68: theory is entirely different from the usual equal-time theory.
69: If one uses constituent momentum cutoff, one violates boost invariance and also
70: encounters non-analytic behavior in the structure of counterterms
71: \cite{c8wilson}.
72: We have done one loop renormalization of the transverse spin
73: operators by imposing cutoff on the relative transverse momenta and on the
74: longitudinal momentum fraction.
75: Upto one loop, we find that all infrared divergences (in the
76: longitudinal momentum fraction) get canceled in the result.
77:
78:
79: The plan of the chapter is as follows.
80: In section 8.1, we discuss the physical relevance of the decomposition of
81: the transverse spin operator and also compare and contrast it with the
82: helicity operator. In
83: section 8.2, we present the calculation of the transverse spin for a dressed
84: quark state upto $O(\alpha_s)$ in perturbation theory.
85: Comparison of this calculation with the perturbative calculation of helicity
86: is given in section 8.3.
87: Discussion and summary are given in section 8.4.
88: The calculation of transverse spin for a system of two free fermions is
89: given in Appendix G. The full evaluation of
90: the transverse spin operator for a dressed quark in an arbitrary reference
91: frame is given in appendix H. There we also show the manifest cancellation
92: of all the center of mass momentum dependent terms. Some details of the
93: calculation are provided in appendix I. We also refer to our original
94: papers, \cite{c8spin,c8hei}.
95:
96: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
97: \section{Decomposition of Transverse Spin and Comparison with Helicity Sum
98: Rule}
99: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
100: The helicity ${\cal J}^3$ and the transverse spin operators ${\cal J}^i$ in
101: light-front theory for a
102: massive particle is given in terms of Poincare generators in chapter 7.
103: In \cite{c8hk} it has been shown explicitly
104: that the helicity operator ${\cal J}^3$ in the light-front gauge,
105: in terms of the dynamical fields in the topologically
106: trivial sector of QCD can be written as
107: \be
108: {\cal J}^3 = {\cal J}_{fi}^3 + {\cal J}_{fo}^3 +{\cal J}_{gi}^3 +{\cal J}_{
109: go}^3
110: \e
111: where ${\cal J}_{fi}^3$ is the fermion intrinsic part, ${\cal J}_{fo}^3$
112: is the fermion orbital part, ${\cal J}_{gi}^3$ is the gluon intrinsic part
113: and ${\cal J}_{go}^3$ is the gluon orbital part.
114: The helicity sum rule is
115: given by, for a longitudinally polarized fermion state
116: \be
117: {1\over {\cal N}} \langle P S^\parallel \mid {\cal J}_{fi}^3 + {\cal J}_{fo}^3 +{\cal J}_{go}^3 +{\cal J}_{
118: gi}^3\mid P S^\parallel \rangle = \pm {1\over 2}.
119: \e
120: In the transverse rest frame ($P^\perp=0$), ${\cal J}^3$ coincides with
121: $J^3$ and the helicity sum rule takes the
122: form
123: \be
124: {1\over {\cal N}} \langle P S^\parallel \mid J_{fi}^3 + J_{fo}^3 +
125: J_{go}^3 +J_{
126: gi}^3\mid P S^\parallel \rangle = \pm {1\over 2}.
127: \e
128:
129:
130: For a boson state, right hand side of the above equation should be replaced with the
131: corresponding helicity. Here, ${\cal N}$ is the normalization constant of
132: the state.
133:
134:
135: Unlike the helicity operator, which can be
136: separated into orbital and spin parts, the transverse spin operators cannot
137: be written as a sum of orbital and spin contributions. Only in the free theory,
138: one can write them as a sum of orbital and spin parts by a unitary
139: transformation called Melosh transformation. In chapter 7, we have
140: shown that the transverse rotation operators can be separated into three
141: distinct components
142: \be
143: F^2 = F^2_{I} + F^2_{II} + F^2_{III},
144: \end{eqnarray}
145: where
146: \begin{eqnarray}
147: F^2_{I}&=& {1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p [ x^- {\cal P}^2_0 - x^2 ({\cal H}_0 +
148: {\cal V}) ], \\
149: F^2_{II} &=&
150: {1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p \Bigg [\xi^\dagger \Big [ \sigma^3 \partial^1 + i \partial^2
151: \Big]{ 1 \over
152: \partial^+} \xi + \Big [ { 1 \over \partial^+} (\partial^1 \xi^\dagger \sigma^3 -
153: i \partial^2 \xi^\dagger) \Big ] \xi \Bigg ] \nonumber \\
154: &&~~~~~~ + {1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p m \Bigg [ \xi^\dagger \Big [{ \sigma^1 \over i \partial^+}
155: \xi\Big ] -
156: \Big [{ 1 \over i \partial^+} \xi^\dagger\sigma^1\Big ] \xi \Bigg ]
157: \nonumber \\
158: && ~~+ {1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p g \Bigg [ \xi^\dagger { 1 \over
159: \partial^+}[(-i \sigma^3 A^1 + A^2)\xi] + { 1 \over \partial^+}
160: [ \xi^\dagger (i \sigma^3 A^1 + A^2)]\xi \Bigg ], \\
161: F^2_{III}&=&
162: - \int dx^- d^2 x^\perp 2(\partial^1 A^{1})A^2 \nonumber \\
163: &&-{1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p g {4\over {\pp^+}} (\xi^\dagger T^a
164: \xi) A^{2a} - {1\over 2} \int dx^- d^2x^\p g f^{abc} {2\over {\pp^+}} (
165: A^{ib} \pp^+ A^{ic} ) A^{2a}
166: \end{eqnarray}
167: where $ {\cal P}^i_0$ is the free momentum density, $ {\cal H}_o$ is the
168: free Hamiltonian density and ${\cal V}$ are the interaction terms in the
169: Hamiltonian in full Hermitian form. It follows that
170: the transverse spin
171: operators ${\cal J}^i$, ($i=1,2$) can also be written as the sum of three
172: parts, ${\cal J}^i_{I}$ whose integrand
173: has explicit coordinate dependence, ${\cal
174: J}^i_{II}$ which arises from the fermionic part, and ${\cal J}^i_{III}$ which
175: arises from the bosonic part of the energy momentum tensor. Thus although
176: the transverse spin operators cannot be separated into an orbital and
177: intrinsic parts, we can still talk of a decomposition into an orbital-like
178: part and two intrinsic-like parts.
179:
180:
181: At this
182: point, we would also like to contrast our work with \cite{c8ji},
183: where a gauge
184: invariant decomposition of nucleon spin has been done. The analysis in
185: \cite{c8ji} has been performed in the rest frame of the hadron and no distinction
186: is made between helicity and transverse spin, whereas, we have worked in the
187: gauge fixed theory in an arbitrary reference frame.
188:
189: In analogy with the helicity sum rule, we propose a decomposition of the
190: transverse spin, which can be written as
191: \be
192: {1\over {\cal N}} \langle P S^\perp \mid {\cal J}^i_I + {\cal J}^i_{II}+ {\cal
193: J}^i_{III} \mid P S^\perp \rangle = \pm {1\over 2}
194: \label{c8tsum}
195: \e
196: for a fermion state polarized in the transverse direction. For a bosonic state, right hand side will be replaced with the
197: corresponding transverse component of spin.
198:
199: The question that now naturally arises is,
200: does the above decomposition have any physical relevance ?
201: In the case of the helicity operator, we know that the hadron expectation
202: value of the fermion intrinsic part ${\cal J}^3_{fi}$ is related to the
203: first moment of the quark helicity distribution function $g_1$ measured in
204: longitudinally polarized DIS. Also ${\cal J}^3_{gi}$ is related to the first
205: moment of the intrinsic gluon helicity distribution. In light-front QCD,
206: helicity is kinematical and independent of interaction, as a result, the
207: helicity sum rule has parton interpretation, that is, the different terms
208: can be expressed as parton helicity distributions. But the transverse spin
209: is dynamical and the corresponding sum rule has no parton interpretation.
210: However, we have shown in chapter 7 that the above decomposition has
211: relevance in the context of transversely polarized DIS.
212: There exists
213: a direct connection between
214: the hadron expectation value of the fermionic intrinsic-like part of the transverse spin
215: operator ${\cal J}^i_{II}$ and the integral of the quark distribution
216: function $g_T$ that
217: appear in transversely polarized deep inelastic scattering. Also we can
218: identify \cite{c8let} the operators that are present in the hadron expectation value
219: of
220: ${\cal J}^i_{III}$ with the operator structures that are present in
221: the integral of the gluon distribution function that appear in transverse
222: polarized hard scattering.
223: The physical relevance of the
224: decomposition is made clear from the identification. Our results show
225: the intimate
226: connection between transverse spin in light-front QCD and transverse
227: polarized deep inelastic scattering. As far as we know, such connections are
228: not established so far in instant form of field theory and this is the
229: first time that the first moment of $g_T$ is related to a conserved
230: quantity. Another
231: important point is that in perturbation theory,
232: the helicity flip interactions which are proportional
233: to mass play a crucial role both in $g_T$ and in the transverse spin
234: operator whereas they are not important in the case of the helicity
235: operator. In fact, one cannot get a transversely polarized state in the
236: absence of mass.
237:
238:
239:
240: Because the transverse spin operators are interaction dependent, they
241: acquire divergences in perturbation theory. One has to regularize them by
242: imposing momentum cutoffs and
243: in the regularized theory the Poincare algebra as well as the commutation
244: relation obeyed by the spin operators are violated \cite{c8glazek}. One has to
245: introduce appropriate counterterms to restore the algebra.
246: In the next section, we perform the renormalization of the full
247: transverse spin operator upto $O(\alpha_s)$ in light-front Hamiltonian
248: perturbation theory by evaluating the matrix element for a quark state
249: dressed with one gluon. This calculation also verifies the relation
250: (\ref{c8tsum})
251: upto $O(\alpha_s)$ in perturbation theory.
252:
253: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
254: \section{Transverse Spin of a Dressed Quark in Perturbation Theory}
255: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
256:
257: In this section, we evaluate the expectation value of the transverse spin
258: operator in perturbative QCD for a dressed quark state.
259:
260: The dressed quark state with fixed helicity $\sigma$ can be expanded in Fock
261: space as
262: \be
263: \mid P, \sigma \rangle &=& \phi^\lambda_1 b^\dagger(P,\sigma) \mid 0 \rangle
264: \nonumber \\
265: && + \sum_{\sigma_1,\lambda_2} \int
266: {dk_1^+ d^2k_1^\perp \over \sqrt{2 (2 \pi)^3 k_1^+}}
267: \int
268: {dk_2^+ d^2k_2^\perp \over \sqrt{2 (2 \pi)^3 k_2^+}}
269: \sqrt{2 (2 \pi)^3 P^+} \delta^3(P-k_1-k_2) \nonumber \\
270: && ~~~~~\phi^\sigma_{\sigma_1, \lambda_2}(P,\mid k_1,; k_2 ) b^\dagger(k_1,
271: \sigma_1) a^\dagger(k_2, \lambda_2) \mid 0 \rangle.
272: \label{c8dr0}
273: \e
274: We are considering dressing with one gluon since we shall evaluate
275: the expectation value upto $O(g^2)$. The normalization of the state is given by
276: \be
277: \langle k',\lambda' \mid k,\lambda \rangle = 2(2\pi)^3 k^+ \delta_{\lambda
278: \lambda'} \delta(k^+ -k'^+) \delta ( k^\perp - k'^\perp).
279: \label{c8nor}
280: \e
281: The quark target transversely polarized in the $x$ direction can be expressed
282: in terms of helicity up and down states by
283: \be
284: \mid k^+, k^\perp, s^1 \rangle = {1\over {\sqrt 2}}(\mid k^+, k^\perp,
285: \uparrow \rangle \pm \mid k^+, k^\perp, \downarrow \rangle)
286: \label{c8dr1}
287: \e
288: with $s^1 = \pm m_R$, where $m_R$ is the renormalized mass of the quark.
289:
290: We introduce the boost invariant amplitudes $\Phi_1^\lambda$ and
291: $\Phi^\lambda_{\sigma_1 \lambda_2}(x, q^\perp)$ respectively by
292: $\phi^\lambda (k) = \Phi_1^\lambda$ and $\phi^\lambda_{\lambda_1 \lambda_2}
293: (k; k_1, k_2)= {1\over {\sqrt k^+}}\Phi^\lambda_{\lambda_1 \lambda_2}(x,
294: q^\perp)$, where $x={k_1^+ \over P^+}$ and $q^\perp = k_1^\perp -
295: x P^\perp$ . From the light-front QCD Hamiltonian, to lowest order in
296: perturbative QCD, we have
297: \be
298: && \Phi_{\sigma_1, \sigma_2}^\lambda (x,q^\perp)
299: = -{ x(1-x) \over { (q^\perp)^2 + m^2(1-x)^2}}{1\over
300: {\sqrt {1-x}}} \nonumber \\
301: &&~~~~~~~~~~\times { g \over {\sqrt {2 (2 \pi)^3}}} T^a
302: \chi^\dagger_{\sigma_1} \Big[ 2 {q^\perp \over 1-x} +
303: {{\tilde \sigma^\perp.q^\perp}\over x} \tilde \sigma^\perp -
304: \tilde \sigma^\perp i m {{1-x}\over x} \Big ] \chi_{\lambda} .{(\epsilon^\perp_{
305: \sigma_2})}^*\Phi^\lambda_1. \label{c8dr2}
306: \label{c8wf}
307: \e
308: Here $m$ is the quark mass and $x$ is the longitudinal momentum carried by
309: the quark. Also, $\tilde \sigma^1 = \sigma^2$ and $ \tilde \sigma^2 = -
310: \sigma^1$. It is to
311: be noted that the $m$ dependence in the above wave function arises from
312: the helicity flip part of the light-front QCD Hamiltonian. This term plays a
313: very important role in the case of transversely polarized target states.
314: Also, we have seen in chapter 7 that a transversely polarized
315: dressed quark state cannot be obtained when quark mass is zero.
316:
317:
318: For simplicity, in this section, we calculate the matrix element of the transverse spin
319: operator for a dressed quark state in a frame where the transverse momentum of
320: the quark is zero. It can be seen from the expressions of ${\cal J}^i$ in
321: chapter 7 that the sole contribution
322: in this case comes from the first term in the right hand side, namely the
323: transverse rotation operator. A detailed calculation of the matrix elements
324: of the transverse spin operator in an arbitrary reference frame is given in
325: appendix H where we have explicitly shown that all the terms depending on
326: $P^\perp$ get canceled.
327:
328: The matrix elements presented below have been evaluated between
329: states of different helicities, namely $\sigma$ and
330: $\sigma'$. Since the transversely polarized state can be
331: expressed in terms of the longitudinally polarized (helicity) states by
332: Eq. (\ref{c8dr1}), the matrix elements of these operators between transversely
333: polarized states can be easily obtained from these expressions.
334:
335: Here, we have used the manifest Hermitian form of all the operators. It is
336: necessary to keep manifest Hermiticity at each intermediate step to cancel
337: terms containing derivative of delta function.
338:
339: The operator ${1\over 2}F^2P^+$ can be separated into three parts,
340: \be
341: {1\over 2}F^2P^+ = {1\over 2}F^2_IP^+ + {1\over 2}F^2_{II}P^+ +
342: {1\over 2}F^2_{III}P^+
343: \e
344: where $F^2_I$, $F^2_{II}$ and $F^2_{III}$ have been defined earlier.
345: The matrix elements of the different parts of these for a dressed quark state
346: are given below. The evaluation of the matrix element of ${1\over 2}F^2_IP^+$
347: is quite complicated since it involves derivatives of delta functions. A
348: part of this calculation has been given in some detail in appendix I.
349: We first consider the operator
350: \be
351: {1\over 2}F^2_IP^+ = {1\over 2}F^2_I(1)P^+ - {1\over 2}F^2_I(2)P^+ -
352: {1\over 2}F^2_I(3)P^+.
353: \label{c8f2i}
354: \e
355: The first term contains the momentum density, the second and the third terms
356: contain the free and the interaction parts of the Hamiltonian density respectively.
357: The matrix elements are given by
358: \be
359: \langle P,\sigma \mid {1\over 2}F^2_I(1)P^+ \mid P, \sigma' \rangle &=&
360: \langle P,\sigma \mid {1\over 2} \int dx d^2q^\perp x^- P^2_0 {1\over
361: 2}P^+ \mid P, \sigma' \rangle \nonumber\\&=& -{i\over 2}\sum_{spin}
362: \int dx d^2q^\perp q^2
363: \Phi^{*\sigma}_{\sigma_1\lambda}{\pp\Phi^{*\sigma'}_{\sigma'_1\lambda'} \over
364: {\pp x}} + h. c.
365: \e
366: \be
367: \lefteqn{\langle P,\sigma \mid {1\over 2}F^2_I(2)P^+\mid P, \sigma' \rangle =
368: \langle P,\sigma \mid {1\over 2} \int dx d^2q^\perp x^2 P^-_0 {1\over
369: 2}P^+\mid P, \sigma' \rangle }\nonumber\\&=&{i\over 4}\sum_{spin}\int dxd^2q^\perp
370: \Phi^{*\sigma}_{\sigma_1\lambda}{\pp \Phi^{\sigma'}_{\sigma'_1\lambda'}
371: \over {\pp q^2}} (q^\perp)^2 \left( {{1-x}\over x} - {x\over {1-x}} \right )
372: \nonumber\\&&~~~~~~~~~ +{i\over 4}\sum_{spin} \int dx d^2q^\perp m^2 {{1-x}\over x}
373: \Phi^{*\sigma}_{\sigma_1
374: \lambda}{\pp \Phi^{\sigma'}_{\sigma'_1\lambda'}\over {\pp q^2}}+ h. c.
375: \e
376: In the above two equations, both the single particle and two particle
377: diagonal matrix elements contribute. Here, {\it h.c.} is the Hermitian conjugate, $\sum_{spin}$ is the summation over $\sigma_1, {\sigma'}_1, \lambda_1,
378: {\lambda'}_1$. $P^-_0$ is the free part of the Hamiltonian density. The
379: interaction part:
380: \be
381: \lefteqn{\langle P, \sigma \mid {1\over 2}F^2_I(3)P^+\mid P, \sigma' \rangle =
382: \langle P, \sigma \mid {1\over 2} \int dx d^2q^\perp x^2 P^-_{int} {1\over
383: 2}P^+\mid P, \sigma' \rangle} \nonumber\\&=& {g\over \sqrt {2(2\pi)^3}}
384: \sum_{spin} \int dxd^2q^\perp {1\over {\sqrt {1-x}}} \Big (
385: -{i\over 4}
386: \Phi_1^{* \sigma} \chi^\dagger_\sigma [ {\tilde \sigma}^2 ( {\tilde
387: \sigma}^\perp \cdot \ep^\perp ) \nonumber\\&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+ {({\tilde
388: \sigma}^\perp \cdot \ep^\perp)
389: {\tilde \sigma}^2 \over x}]\chi_{\sigma_1} \Phi^{\sigma'}_{\sigma_1
390: \lambda}+ h. c.\Big ).
391: \e
392: $P^-_{int}$ is the interaction part of the light-front QCD Hamiltonian
393: density. The manifestly Hermitian form of it is given in Appendix D.
394: The interaction part of the Hamiltonian contains $qqg$, $ggg$, $qqgg$,
395: $qqqq$ and $gggg$ terms. Only the $qqg$ part of it contributes to the dressed quark matrix
396: element.
397:
398: The operator ${1\over 2}F^2_{II}P^+$ which originates from the fermionic
399: part of the energy momentum tensor, can be separated into three parts,
400:
401:
402: \be
403: {1\over 2}F^2_{II}P^+ = {1\over 2}F^2_{mII}P^+ + {1\over 2}F^2_{q^\perp II}P^++
404: {1\over 2}F^2_{gII}P^+
405: \e
406: where ${1\over 2}F^2_{mII}P^+$ is the explicit mass
407: dependent part of the operator, ${1\over 2}F^2_{q^\perp II}P^+$ is the part
408: containing derivatives with respect to $x^\perp$ and ${1\over 2}F^2_{g II}P^+$ is
409: the interaction part. The matrix elements are given by
410: \be
411: \langle P, \sigma \mid {1\over 2}F^2_{mII}P^+ \mid P, \sigma'
412: \rangle = {m\over 2}\Phi^{*\sigma}_1
413: \Phi^{\sigma'}_1 + {m\over 2}\sum_{spin} \int dx d^2q^\perp \Phi^{*\sigma}_{\sigma_1
414: \lambda} \chi^\dagger_{\sigma_1} \sigma^1 \chi_{\sigma'_1}
415: \Phi^{\sigma'}_{\sigma'_1
416: \lambda'} {1\over x}, \label{c8m2}
417: \e
418: \be
419: \langle P, \sigma \mid {1\over 2}F^2_{q^\perp II} P^+ \mid P, \sigma'
420: \rangle &=&
421: {1\over 2}\sum_{spin}\int dx d^2q^\perp \Phi^{*\sigma}_{\sigma_1
422: \lambda} \chi^\dagger_{\sigma_1} \sigma^3 q^1 \chi_{\sigma'_1}
423: \Phi^{\sigma'}_{\sigma'_1 \lambda'} {1\over x},
424: \label{c8q2}
425: \e
426: \be
427: \langle P, \sigma \mid {1\over 2}F^2_{g II} P^+ \mid P, \sigma'
428: \rangle &=& {1\over 4} {g\over {\sqrt {2(2 \pi)^3}}}\sum_{spin} \int dx d^2q^\perp
429: {1\over {\sqrt {1-x}}} \Big ( i\Phi^{*\sigma}_1 \nonumber\\&&\Big [
430: \chi^\dagger_\sigma (
431: -i\sigma^3 \ep^1_\lambda + \ep^2_\lambda ) \chi_{\sigma_1} - {1\over x}
432: \chi^\dagger_\sigma (i\sigma^3 \ep^1_\lambda + \ep^2_\lambda ) \chi_{\sigma_1}
433: \Big ] \Phi^{\sigma'}_{\sigma_1 \lambda}
434: \nonumber\\&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + h. c.\Big ) . \label{c8g2}
435: \e
436: In Eqs. (\ref{c8m2}) and (\ref{c8q2}), contributions come from only diagonal
437: matrix elements whereas Eq. (\ref{c8g2}) contain only off-diagonal matrix
438: elements.
439: The matrix element of ${1\over 2}F^2_{III} P^+$, which comes from the
440: gluonic part, is given by
441: \be
442: \lefteqn{\langle P, \sigma \mid {1\over 2}F^2_{III} P^+ \mid P, \sigma'
443: \rangle = -{g \over {\sqrt {2(2\pi)^3}}}
444: \sum_{spin} \int dx d^2q^\perp {1\over
445: {\sqrt {1-x}}}}\nonumber\\&&~~~ \Big ( \Phi^{*\sigma}_1 \ep^2_\lambda
446: \Phi^{\sigma'}_{\sigma_1 \lambda}{1\over {i(1-x)}} + h. c. \Big )
447: - \int dx d^2q^\perp {q^1\over (1-x)} \sum_{\lambda,
448: \sigma_1, \sigma'_1} \lambda
449: \Phi^{*\sigma}_{\sigma_1 \lambda}\Phi^{\sigma'}_{\sigma'_1
450: \lambda} .
451: \e
452: The first term in the right hand side is the off-diagonal contribution which comes from
453: the interaction dependent part of the operator. The second term is
454: the diagonal contribution coming from the free part.
455:
456: The expectation value of the transverse spin operator between transversely
457: polarized states is given by
458: \be
459: \langle P, S^1 \mid M{\cal J}^1 \mid P, S^1
460: \rangle = \langle P,S^1 \mid {1\over 2} F^2 P^+ + K^3P^2 - {1\over 2}
461: E^2 P^- - P^1 {\cal J}^3 \mid P, S^1 \rangle.
462: \e
463: Since we are in the reference frame with zero $P^\perp$, only the first term
464: in the right hand side, i.e. the ${1\over 2} F^2 P^+$ term will contribute, as mentioned
465: earlier. We substitute
466: for $\Phi^\sigma_{\sigma_1 \lambda}$ using Eq. (\ref{c8wf}). The final forms of
467: the matrix elements are given by
468: \be
469: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_I(1) \mid P, S^1 \rangle = -{m
470: \alpha_s\over {4 \pi}}C_f {\rm ln} {Q^2\over \mu^2} \int_\ep^{1-\ep} dx (1+x),
471: \e
472: \be
473: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_I(2) \mid P, S^1 \rangle = {m
474: \alpha_s\over {4 \pi}}C_f {\rm ln} {Q^2\over \mu^2} \int_\ep^{1-\ep} dx (1-2x) ,
475: \e
476: \be
477: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_I(3) \mid P, S^1 \rangle = -{m
478: \alpha_s\over {4 \pi}}C_f{\rm ln} {Q^2\over \mu^2} \int_\ep^{1-\ep} dx (1-x)
479: \e
480: where $M{\cal J}^1_I(1), M{\cal J}^1_I(2)$ and $ M{\cal J}^1_I(3)$ are
481: related respectively to $F^2_I(1), F^2_I(2)$ and $ F^2_I(3)$ defined
482: earlier.
483: $\mu $ is the hadronic factorization scale for separating the `hard'
484: and `soft' dynamics of QCD, i. e. we have set a hadronic scale such that
485: ${\mid q^\perp \mid }^2 >> \mu^2 >>m^2$. $\ep$ is a small cutoff on the
486: longitudinal momentum fraction which can be safely taken to zero at the end
487: of the calculation.
488:
489: So we obtain, from the above three expressions, using
490: Eq. (\ref{c8f2i}),
491: \be
492: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_I \mid P, S^1 \rangle = -{m
493: \alpha_s\over {4 \pi}}C_f {\rm ln} {Q^2\over \mu^2} .
494: \label{c8dr4}
495: \e
496: The contribution to the matrix element of $M{\cal J}^1_{II}$ entirely comes from
497: $F^2_{II}$. The various parts of this matrix element are given by
498: \be
499: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_{mII} \mid P, S^1 \rangle = {1\over 2} m
500: {\mid \Phi^\sigma_1 \mid }^2 +
501: {m\alpha_s \over {2 \pi}} C_f {\rm ln}{Q^2\over \mu^2}\int_\ep^{1-\ep} dx{1\over {1-x}},
502: \label{c8dr6}
503: \e
504: \be
505: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_{q^\perp II} \mid P, S^1 \rangle =
506: -{m\alpha_s \over {4\pi}} C_f {\rm ln}{Q^2\over \mu^2}\int_\ep^{1-\ep} dx(1-x),
507: \e
508: \be
509: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_{g II} \mid P, S^1 \rangle =
510: {m\alpha_s \over {4\pi}} C_f {\rm ln}{Q^2\over \mu^2}{1\over 2},
511: \e
512: where $M{\cal J}^1_{m II}, M{\cal J}^1_{q^\perp II}$ and $ M{\cal J}^1_{g
513: II}$ are related respectively to $F^2_{mII}, F^2_{q^\perp II}$ and $ F^2_{g
514: II}$. In Eq. (\ref{c8dr6}) we have to use the normalization condition
515: \be
516: {\mid \Phi^\sigma_1 \mid }^2 = 1- {\alpha_s\over {2\pi}} C_f {\rm ln}{Q^2 \over
517: \mu^2} \int_\ep^{1-\ep}dx {1+x^2\over {1-x}}.
518: \e
519: Upto $O(\alpha_s)$, the normalization condition will contribute only in the
520: first term of Eq. (\ref{c8dr6}).
521: We get, from Eq. (\ref{c8dr6}),
522: \be
523: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_{mII} \mid P, S^1 \rangle = {1\over 2} m
524: +{m\alpha_s \over {4 \pi}} C_f {\rm ln}{Q^2\over \mu^2}\int_\ep^{1-\ep} dx
525: \left (
526: {2\over {1-x}}-{{1+x^2}\over {1-x}} \right ).
527: \e
528: It is clear that the singularity at $x=1$ is canceled due to
529: the contribution from the normalization condition.
530: The overall contribution coming from $M{\cal J}^1_{II}$ is given by
531: \be
532: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_{II} \mid P, S^1 \rangle = {m\over 2} \left (1+
533: {3\alpha_s \over {4\pi}} C_f {\rm ln}{Q^2\over \mu^2}\right ),
534: \e
535: which does not involve any $x$ divergence.
536: The matrix element of $M{\cal J}^1_{III}$ is given by
537: \be
538: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_{III} \mid P, S^1 \rangle =
539: {2m\alpha_s \over {4\pi}} C_f {\rm ln}{Q^2\over \mu^2}\int_\ep^{1-\ep} ( 1-x) dx.
540: \label{c8dr5}
541: \e
542: It is to be noted that all the contributing matrix elements are proportional
543: to the quark mass. Among the different parts of the operator, only ${\cal
544: J}^i_{mII}$ and a part of the interaction terms in ${\cal J}^i_I$
545: are proportional to the quark mass $m$. These mass dependent
546: terms flip the quark helicity. It is also to be noted that the terms
547: proportional to $m^2$ do not flip the helicity. In all the other terms, though the operators
548: do not depend on $m$ explicitly, the contributions to the matrix elements
549: arise from the interference of the $m$ terms in the wave function of
550: Eq. (\ref{c8wf}), with the non-$m$ dependent terms through the different parts
551: of the transverse spin operator. Since in light-front formulation, helicity
552: and chirality are the same, these linear in $m$ terms are explicit
553: chiral symmetry
554: breaking terms.
555: From Eq. (\ref{c8dr4}) and Eq. (\ref{c8dr5}) we find that
556: \be
557: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_{I}+ M {\cal J}^1_{III} \mid P, S^1 \rangle =
558: {m \alpha_s \over {4 \pi}} C_f {\rm ln} {Q^2 \over \mu^2} \int_\ep^{1-\ep} (1-2x) dx
559: = 0
560: \e
561: which means that the entire contribution to the matrix element of the
562: transverse spin operator is given by
563: \be
564: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1 \mid P, S^1 \rangle =
565: {m\over 2} \left ( 1 + {3 \alpha_s \over {4\pi}} C_f {\rm ln}{Q^2\over \mu^2}
566: \right).
567: \e
568: This contribution entirely comes from $M{\cal J}^1_{II}$. Contribution from the
569: orbital-like part $(M{\cal J}^1_I)$ exactly cancels the contribution from the
570: gluon intrinsic-like part $(M{\cal J}^1_{III})$.
571:
572: The renormalized mass $m_R$ of the quark is given in terms of the bare
573: mass upto order $\alpha_s$ in light-front Hamiltonian perturbation theory
574: by \cite{c8hari3},
575: \be
576: m_R = m \left( 1 + { 3 \alpha_s \over {4 \pi}}C_f{\rm ln} {Q^2 \over \mu^2} \right
577: ).
578: \e
579: In the light-front formulation of QCD, there are two mass terms in the
580: Hamiltonian, one is quadratic in $m$ which is present in the free part and
581: does not break chiral symmetry, the other is linear in $m$ which we discuss
582: here and which explicitly cause chiral symmetry breaking. An important
583: feature of light-front QCD is that, these two mass scales are renormalized
584: differently even in the perturbative region. The renormalization of $m^2$ is
585: different from the result stated above.
586:
587: Adding all the parts, for a dressed quark in perturbation theory upto $O(g^2)$, the
588: expectation value of the transverse spin operator is given by
589: \be
590: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1 \mid P, S^1 \rangle &=&
591: \langle P, S^1 \mid M {\cal J}^1_{I}+M {\cal J}^1_{II}+M {\cal J}^1_{III}
592: \mid P, S^1\rangle \nonumber\\&=& {m_R\over 2} .
593: \e
594: It is important to mention that here we are calculating the expectation
595: value of the operator $M{\cal J}^i$. In order to extract the eigenvalue of
596: ${\cal J}^i$
597: one has to know the eigenvalue of $M$. Both $M{\cal J}^i$ and $M$ are
598: dynamical operators. However, in this case,
599: the mass $M$ in the left hand side in the renormalized theory is nothing but the
600: renormalized mass of the quark, which therefore gets canceled from the
601: above equation, and we get
602: \be
603: \langle P, S^1 \mid {\cal J}^1 \mid P, S^1 \rangle &=&
604: \langle P, S^1 \mid {\cal J}^1_{I}+ {\cal J}^1_{II}+ {\cal J}^1_{III}
605: \mid P, S^1 \rangle \nonumber\\&=& {1\over 2}.
606: \e
607:
608: The identification of ${\cal J}$ with spin, therefore, requires knowledge of
609: the mass eigenvalue, independently of the boost invariance properties of the
610: light-front dynamics.
611:
612: We can explicitly verify the relation between the integral of $g_T$ and the
613: expectation value of the fermion intrinsic-like part of the transverse spin
614: operator to order $\alpha_s$ in perturbative QCD.
615: The transverse polarized structure function for a dressed quark is
616: given \cite{c8hari1} by,
617: \be
618: g_T(x, Q^2) &=&{e^2_q\over 2}{m\over S^1} \Big \{ \delta (1-x) +
619: {\alpha_s \over {2\pi}} C_f {\rm ln}{Q^2\over \mu^2} \Big [ {1+2x -x^2\over
620: {1-x}} - \delta(1-x) \int_0^1 dx' {1+{x'}^2\over {1-x'}}
621: \nonumber\\&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+{1\over 2}
622: \delta (1-x) \Big ] \Big \} ,
623: \e
624: so we get
625: \be
626: \int_0^1 g_T (x) dx = {e_q^2\over {2S^1}}\langle P, S^1 \mid M{\cal J}^1_{II} \mid P, S^1\rangle
627: \e
628: which explicitly shows the connection between the integral of the transverse
629: polarized structure function and the matrix element of the fermion
630: intrinsic-like part of
631: the transverse spin operator. It can be seen that the operator structure of $M{\cal
632: J}^1_{mII}$ as well as the corresponding part of $g_T$ is related to the
633: quark transversity distribution $h_1$ \cite{c8dip}.
634:
635: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
636: \section{Comparison with the Perturbative Calculation of Helicity ${\cal
637: J}^3$}
638: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
639: It is quite instructive to compare our calculation of the transverse spin of
640: the dressed quark with the helicity of the dressed quark \cite{c8hk} in
641: perturbative QCD. All the operators contributing to helicity are kinematical
642: (interaction independent) and hence all of them give rise to only diagonal
643: contributions. Further, in this calculation mass of the quark can be
644: completely ignored since they give rise to only power-suppressed
645: contribution. In the massless limit, helicity is conserved at the quark
646: gluon vertex. This means that the quark in the quark-gluon state has the
647: same helicity as the parent quark.
648: Since the transverse gluon carry helicity $\pm 1$, we get a non-vanishing
649: contribution from the gluon intrinsic helicity operator. However, both the
650: quark and the gluon in the quark-gluon state have non-vanishing orbital
651: angular momentum due to transverse motion. Conservation of total helicity
652: implies that orbital contribution has to cancel gluon intrinsic helicity
653: contribution. This is precisely what happens \cite{c8hk} and
654: we find that the total quark plus gluon
655: orbital part exactly canceled the intrinsic gluon contribution and the
656: overall contribution to the helicity is $\pm{1\over 2}$, which entirely
657: comes from the intrinsic part of the fermionic helicity operator.
658:
659:
660: In contrast, in the case of transverse spin operator, it
661: has both interaction independent and interaction dependent parts. The latter
662: gives rise to off-diagonal matrix elements and they play a very important
663: role. Of special interest is the gluon intrinsic-like transverse spin
664: operator. This operator gives vanishing matrix elements for a free gluon.
665: However, since gluon in the quark-gluon state has intrinsic transverse
666: momentum, both diagonal and off-diagonal terms give rise to non-vanishing
667: contributions and we get a net non-vanishing matrix element for the gluon
668: intrinsic-like transverse spin operator. However, we find that
669: contribution from this matrix element is completely canceled by that from the matrix elements of
670: orbital-like transverse spin operators. This is analogous to what
671: happens in the helicity case.
672: \vskip .2in
673: In this section, the calculation of the matrix elements has been done
674: in the frame with
675: $P^\perp = 0$. The complete calculation of the matrix element of the
676: transverse spin operator in an arbitrary reference frame is given in
677: appendix H.
678: It is clear from the expressions there that all the terms explicitly
679: dependent on $P^\perp$ get canceled in the expectation value of $M{\cal
680: J}^1$. The parts that remain after the cancellation of
681: the $P^\perp$ dependent terms are those given above.
682: In the above expressions, we have used the manifest Hermitian form of the operators.
683: We again stress the fact that this manifest cancellation of contributions
684: from center of mass motion is
685: typical in light-front field theory because the transverse boost
686: operators are kinematical. The situation in the equal time relativistic case
687: is completely different and there one cannot separate out the center of mass
688: motion from the internal motion in a straightforward way even in the
689: free theory case \cite{c8os}
690: because of the complicated boost generators. Due to the manifest cancellation
691: of the center of mass momenta, ${\cal J}^i$ can truly be identified as the
692: transverse spin operator.
693:
694:
695: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
696: \section{Summary and Discussions}
697: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
698:
699: In chapter 7, we initiated the investigation of the transverse spin
700: operators in QCD. In this chapter, we have continued the analysis and
701: discussed two very important aspects of it.
702: In analogy with the helicity sum rule, we have proposed a
703: decomposition for the transverse spin. Earlier we have shown
704: the relationship between
705: nucleon matrix elements of ${\cal J}^i_{II}$ and ${\cal J}^i_{III}$
706: and
707: the first moments of quark and gluon structure functions respectively,
708: appearing in
709: transverse polarized hard scattering. This is the first time that
710: the integral of $g_T$ is related to a conserved quantity, namely the
711: transverse spin operator. It is important to mention here that the proposed
712: decomposition of the transverse spin operator will not be affected if one
713: adds a total derivative term to the angular momentum density. Such a term can
714: at most produce a surface term which we are neglecting since we have
715: restricted ourselves to the topologically trivial sector of the theory.
716: We have started with the angular momentum density defined in terms of the
717: symmetric gauge invariant stress-energy tensor, which is obtained from the
718: Noether's stress-energy tensor by adding a total derivative term.
719: Even though the angular momentum density differs from the Noether angular
720: momentum density by a total
721: derivative term, both give rise to the same generators.
722: Another point worth mentioning is that we have worked in the gauge fixed
723: theory. In the light-front gauge, $A^+=0$, the transverse spin operator can
724: be separated into three parts, and ${\cal J}_{II}^i$ is related to
725: the first moment of $g_T$ measured in transverse polarized scattering, which
726: is a gauge invariant object. This is similar to the helicity case, where
727: only in the light-front gauge and using light-front quantization, the intrinsic fermionic
728: helicity is related to the gauge invariant first moment of $g_1$ measured in
729: longitudinally polarized scattering. The corresponding gluon intrinsic
730: helicity cannot be
731: measured directly in polarized deep inelastic lepton-nucleon scattering but in some other process
732: like polarized hadron-hadron scattering. A similar situation holds in the
733: case of transverse spin.
734:
735: We have also discussed another important issue, namely, the renormalization
736: of the transverse spin operators.
737: In light-front theory, in addition to the
738: Hamiltonian, transverse spin operators also contain interactions and have a
739: complicated structure. They are dynamical operators.
740: Since transverse rotational symmetry is not manifest in light-front theory,
741: a study of these operators is essential for questions regarding Lorentz invariance
742: in the theory \cite{c8glazek}.
743: Since they are interaction dependent, they will acquire
744: divergences in perturbation theory just like the Hamiltonian. It is of
745: interest to find the physical meaning of these divergences and their
746: renormalization.
747: The renormalization of only the intrinsic-like fermion
748: part of the
749: transverse spin operator has been discussed in the literature so far.
750: In this chapter, we have carried out the renormalization of the
751: full transverse spin operator for the first time upto $O(\alpha_s)$ in
752: light-front Hamiltonian perturbation theory by evaluating the matrix
753: elements for a dressed quark target. We have shown that the entire
754: contribution to the matrix element comes from the fermion intrinsic-like
755: part of the
756: transverse spin operator and is equal to ${1\over 2}$. The
757: contributions from ${\cal J}^i_{I}$ and
758: ${\cal J}^i_{III}$ exactly get canceled. Also, the mass of the quark is
759: very crucial in this case, since the helicity flip interactions which are
760: proportional to the quark mass play a very important role.
761: However, the terms proportional to $m^2$ do not flip the helicity and do not
762: contribute. Since helicity flip is involved, we do not encounter any
763: quadratic divergence unlike the case of renormalization of the
764: light-front Hamiltonian.
765: Further, we have compared and contrasted the calculations of transverse spin
766: and helicity of a dressed quark in perturbation theory.
767:
768: In this chapter, we have also verified the frame independence of our results. We have
769: explicitly shown that, in an arbitrary reference frame, all the terms
770: depending on the center of mass momenta manifestly get canceled in the
771: matrix element. The cancellation is as simple as in non-relativistic theory
772: since boost is kinematical on the light-front. For future studies, it is an
773: interesting problem to evaluate non-pertubatively \cite{c8bk} the matrix
774: element of the transverse spin operator in light-front QCD. Also, in this work,
775: we have used cutoff on the relative transverse momenta and the small $x$
776: divergence gets canceled in the one loop result. It is interesting to study
777: the renormalization of
778: the transverse spin operators using similarity renormalization technique
779: \cite{c8wilson}.
780:
781:
782: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
783: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
784: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
785:
786: \bibitem{c8hk} A. Harindranath and R. Kundu, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 59},
787: 116013 (1999).
788:
789: \bibitem{c8ang} S. J. Brodsky, D. S. Hwang, B. Q. Ma and I. Schmidt,
790: hep-th/0003082.
791:
792: \bibitem{c8wilson} K. G. Wilson, T. S. Walhout, A. Harindranath, W. M. Zhang,
793: R. J. Perry, S. D. Glazek, Phys. Rev. {\bf D49}, 6720, (1994).
794:
795: \bibitem{c8spin} A. Harindranath, A. Mukherjee and R. Ratabole, Phys. Rev.
796: {\bf D63}, 045006 (2001).
797:
798: \bibitem{c8hei} A. Mukherjee, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. {\bf B90}, 31 (2000).
799:
800: \bibitem{c8ji} X. Ji, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 78}, 610(1997).
801:
802: \bibitem{c8let} A. Harindranath, A. Mukherjee and R. Ratabole,
803: Phys. Lett. {\bf B476}, 471 (2000).
804:
805: \bibitem{c8glazek} T. Maslowski and S. Glazek, hep-th/9906140.
806:
807: \bibitem{c8hari3} R.J. Perry, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 300}, 8 (1993);
808: A. Harindranath and W.-M. Zhang, Phys. Rev. {\bf D
809: 48}, 4903 (1993).
810:
811: \bibitem{c8hari1} A. Harindranath and W.-M. Zhang, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 408}, 347
812: (1997).
813:
814: \bibitem{c8dip} A. Mukherjee and D. Chakrabarti, hep-ph/0102003, to appear in
815: Phys. Lett. B.
816:
817: \bibitem{c8os} B. Bakamjian and L. H. Thomas, Phys. Rev. {\bf 92}, 1300
818: (1950);
819: H. Osborn, Phys. Rev. {\bf 176}, 1514 (1968).
820:
821: \bibitem{c8bk} See for example, M. Burkardt and H. El-Khozondar,
822: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 60}, 054504 (1999).
823:
824:
825: \end{thebibliography}
826: