1: \documentstyle[12pt]{article}
2: \textheight 21truecm
3: \textwidth 14truecm
4: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
5: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
6: \def\ba{\begin{array}}
7: \def\ea{\end{array}}
8: \input psfig
9:
10: \begin{document}
11: \title{What is inside the nucleon?}
12: \author{ Manmohan Gupta and Harleen Dahiya \\
13: {\it Department of Physics,} \\
14: {\it Centre of Advanced Study in Physics,} \\
15: {\it Panjab University,Chandigarh-160 014, India.}}
16: \maketitle
17:
18: \begin{abstract}
19: We briefly review the structure of nucleon in the context of QCD,
20: Constituent Quark Model and Chiral Quark Model.
21: \end{abstract}
22:
23:
24: \section{Introduction}
25:
26: The quest to peep into the successive layers of structure of
27: matter has led us from molecules to atoms
28: and from atoms to subatomic particles and so on.
29: This quest, after
30: painstaking efforts by experimentalists and theoreticians
31: together, in the present context has yielded a coherent
32: understanding of matter at the level of $10^{-18}$m. At
33: the present stage of scrutiny, the fundamental constituents
34: of matter are quarks and leptons interacting through gauge
35: bosons. There are six quarks, set up in well separated
36: three generations, for example,
37: \be
38: {\rm Quarks}: ~~~
39: \left( \begin{array}{c} u \\ d \end{array} \right)~~~
40: \left( \begin{array}{c} c \\ s \end{array} \right)~~~
41: \left( \begin{array}{c} t \\ b \end{array} \right).
42: \ee
43: This pattern is repeated for the leptons, each generation
44: containing a charged lepton and a corresponding neutrino,
45: for example,
46:
47: \be
48: {\rm Leptons}: ~~~
49: \left( \begin{array}{c} e^- \\
50: \nu_e \end{array} \right)~~~
51: \left( \begin{array}{c} \mu^- \\
52: \nu_{\mu} \end{array} \right)~~~
53: \left( \begin{array}{c} \tau^- \\
54: \nu_{\tau} \end{array} \right).
55: \ee
56:
57: At the present level of our understanding, quarks and
58: leptons are structureless objects having definite quantum
59: numbers and members of both categories carry spin half.
60: All matter, have to be made up of quarks, leptons and
61: the corresponding antiparticles. Unlike leptons, quarks
62: have been ``seen'' only inside the hadrons. The theory
63: describing the interaction of these fundamental particles
64: is the $SU(3)_C \times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ gauge theory
65: called the minimal Standard Model (MSM). The MSM has two
66: distinct parts: `Quantum Chromodynamics' (QCD)
67: \cite{{frit},{koller},{qcd}}, described by the gauge group
68: $SU(3)_C$ and `Electroweak Model' \cite{{glas},{wei},{salam}}
69: described by
70: $SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$. The electroweak model describes
71: all possible electromagnetic and weak processes, with all
72: the electromagnetic interactions mediated by photons and the
73: weak processes, on the other hand, mediated by three massive
74: vector bosons, two charged ($W^{\pm}$) and one neutral
75: ($Z^o$). The basic electromagnetic interaction is
76: characterized by the vertex given in Figure 1 where a charged
77: fermion couples to electromagnetic interaction. Interestingly,
78: all other e.m. interactions can be built from this basic
79: interaction. The weak interactions in the Standard Model are
80: characterized by emission and absorption of $W^{\pm}$ and
81: $Z^o$. In Figure 2(a) we have shown the decay
82: $n \rightarrow p+e+{\bar {\nu}_e}$, mediated by charged
83: vector boson, whereas in Figure 2(b) we have shown the weak
84: interactions mediated by $Z^o$, usually called neutral current
85: interactions.
86:
87: \begin{figure}
88: \centerline{\psfig{figure=em.eps,width=8cm,height=5cm}}
89: \caption{Electromagnetic interaction.}
90: \end{figure}
91:
92: \begin{figure}
93: \centerline{\psfig{figure=weak.eps,width=11cm,height=6cm}}
94: \caption{Weak interaction.}
95: \end{figure}
96:
97:
98:
99: All hadrons (mesons and baryons) are made up of quarks and
100: antiquarks with $q-q$ and $q-\bar q$ interactions mediated
101: through gluons, the theory describing the interactions is
102: called Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD).
103: Naively speaking baryons are made up of three valence quarks
104: and mesons are made up of $q-\bar q$ combination. A proton,
105: for example, is made up of two $u$ quarks (each having $+2/3
106: |e|$ charge) and a $d$ quark having charge $-1/3 |e|$. Similarly
107: a neutron would consist of two $d$ quarks and a $u$ quark. In
108: Table 1, we have given the valence quark content of some of
109: the well known baryons and mesons. Since the basic purpose
110: of the article is to explore the structure of nucleon,
111: we, therefore, in the sequel detail some of the essentials
112: of QCD.
113:
114: \begin{table}
115: \begin{center}
116: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|} \hline
117: Mesons & Quark content & Baryons & Quark content \\ \hline
118:
119: $\pi^{\pm}$ & $u \bar d$, $d \bar u$ & p & uud \\
120: $\pi^o$ & $(u \bar u, d \bar d)$ & n & udd \\
121: $K^{\pm}$ & $u \bar s, s \bar u$ & $\Sigma^+$ & uus \\
122: $K^o, \bar K^o$ & $d \bar s, s \bar d$ & $\Sigma^o$ & dds \\
123: $\eta$ & $(u \bar u, d \bar d, s \bar s)$ & $\Xi^o$
124: & uss \\
125: & & $\Xi^-$ & dss \\
126: & & $\Lambda$ & uds \\ \hline
127: \end{tabular}
128: \caption{Valence quark structure of some of the important
129: mesons and baryons.}
130: \end{center}
131: \end{table}
132:
133: \section{Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD)}
134:
135: In QCD, quarks are
136: endowed with an additional `color' degree of freedom,
137: for example, `red' (R), `green' (G) and `blue' (B)
138: with the $q-q$ and
139: $q-\bar q$ interactions mediated by octet of colored gluons.
140: Gluons are similar to photons in that they have zero rest mass
141: and spin 1. However, photons carry no charge whereas gluons
142: carry color charge. The octet of colored gluons can be
143: characterised as follows:
144: \[ R \bar B~~~~ R \bar G~~~~ G \bar B~~~
145: \frac{1}{\sqrt 2}(B \bar B-G \bar G) \]
146: \[ B \bar R~~~ G \bar R~~~ B \bar G~~~
147: \frac{1}{\sqrt 6}(B \bar B+G \bar G-2 R \bar R) \]
148: Hadrons are colorless implying thereby that they are
149: color-singlet in the color space. Although the purpose of
150: the article is not to go into the technical details of the
151: gluon mediated $q-q$ interactions, however, in order
152: to facilitate the understanding of certain concepts, we would
153: mention the QCD Lagrangian \cite{pro}, for example,
154: \be
155: L_{QCD}=-\frac{1}{4}F^{(a)}_{\mu \nu} F^{(a) \mu \nu} +
156: i\sum_{q} \bar{\psi}^i_q \gamma^{\mu} (D_{\mu})_{ij}
157: \psi^j_q- \sum_{q} m_q \bar{\psi}_q^i \psi_{qi}, \label{disl}
158: \ee
159: \be
160: F^{(a)}_{\mu \nu}= \partial_{\mu}A^a_{\nu}-
161: \partial_{nu}A_{\mu}^a+g_s f_{abc} A_{\mu}^b
162: A_{\nu}^c,
163: \ee
164: \be
165: (D_{\mu})_{ij}=\delta_{ij} \partial_{\mu}-i g_s \sum_{a}
166: \frac{\lambda_{i,j}^a}{2} A_{\mu}^a,
167: \ee
168:
169: where $g_s$ is the QCD coupling constant and $f_{abc}$ are
170: the structure constants of the $SU(3)$ algebra, $\psi$ is the
171: quark field and $A$ is the gauge field. The $q-q$ $q-\bar q$
172: interactions are usually discussed in terms of $\alpha_s$
173: which is related to the QCD gauge coupling, $g_s$ as
174: \be
175: \alpha_s=\frac{g_s^2}{4 \pi}.
176: \ee
177: There are certain features of QCD which are quite distinctive
178: compared to Quantum Electrodynamics(QED). As is evident from
179: the definition of $F^{(a) \mu \nu}$, in terms of gluon field
180: $A^{(a)}_{\mu}$, there is a self interaction represented by
181: $g_sf_{abc} A^{(b)}_{\mu} A^{(c)}_{\nu}$ which is absent in
182: the case of photon mediated QED. The self interaction of
183: gluon in fact is a general property of any of the non-Abelian
184: gauge field theory. Another extremely important property of
185: QCD, which is also a general characteristic of the gauge
186: field theories, is the momentum dependence of the coupling
187: constants. The effective QCD coupling, $\alpha_s(Q^2)$,
188: can be shown to have the following momentum dependence at
189: momentum scale $Q$
190: \be
191: \alpha_s(Q^2)=\alpha_s(\mu^2)-{\alpha_s}^2(\mu^2)
192: \beta_o {\rm ln}(Q^2/\mu^2)+ ........
193: \ee
194: where the $\beta_o$ is calculated to be
195:
196: \be
197: \beta_o=\frac{11 N_c-2 n_f}{12 \pi}.
198: \ee
199: $N_c$ is the number of colors (=3), $n_f$ is the
200: number of active flavors, $i.e.$ the number of flavors
201: whose mass threshold is below the momentum scale, $Q$.
202: The corresponding momentum dependence of the electromagnetic
203: fine structure constant, in the case of QED, is given as
204: \be
205: \alpha(Q^2)=\alpha(m^2)-\frac{{\alpha}^2(m^2)}{3 \pi}
206: {\rm log}(-Q^2/m^2)+ ........
207: \ee
208: From the above expression, one can find out that
209: $\alpha$ has the value 1/137
210: at energies which are not large compared with the electron
211: mass, however at LEP energies (101 GeV), it takes a value
212: closer to 1/128. In contrast to the electromagnetic
213: interactions, which is an Abelian gauge theory, the coupling
214: constant in the case of non-Abelian gauge theory decreases as
215: the energy increases, as can be checked from Equation (7).
216: Therefore, in the case of QCD, the coupling of one quark to
217: another is weak at very short distances or large four
218: momentum transfer squared ($Q^2$). The property
219: $\alpha_s \rightarrow 0$ as $Q \rightarrow \infty$ is
220: known as ``asymptotic freedom'' and helps to explain why
221: quarks deep within hadrons are essentially free particles.
222: Conversely, the effective couplings grow as we go to large
223: distances and tends to infinity at very large distances or
224: small $Q^2$ and as a consequence it is impossible to separate
225: quarks. This property of increasing $\alpha_s$ at large
226: distances and consequently confinement of quarks is called
227: ``infrared slavery''. At a deeper level the concept of
228: infrared slavery could be attributed to the self-interaction
229: of gluons in the case of QCD.
230:
231:
232: Naively speaking, thus we have two different pictures of
233: the inside of the nucleon, one at short distance and the
234: other at large distance. At sufficiently short distances,
235: which can be probed at sufficiently large energies, we can
236: consider quarks and gluons interacting very weakly with
237: each other, hence we can perform calculations of the
238: scattering cross-sections with the perturbative techniques.
239: At large distances, the nonlinearity of gluon-gluon couplings
240: come fully into play, as a consequence it is very difficult
241: to understand.
242:
243: QCD has registered remarkable success in the limit
244: $Q^2 \rightarrow \infty$, where it is amenable to perturbative
245: calculations. In particular, it has helped in establishing
246: the quark degree of freedom, gluons \cite{{jade},{cello}} and
247: the presence of $q \bar q$ pairs inside the nucleon.
248: From the deep inelastic scattering, we learn that the
249: nucleon is composed of spin 1/2 point like particles which
250: can be identified with the quarks. However in the low energy
251: limit, in view of the intractability of the QCD, the
252: progress in this direction is painstakingly slow. However,
253: considerable insight has been achieved through lattice
254: calculations, QCD sum rules, $1/N_c$ expansions etc. The vast
255: amount of low energy data, however, is usually explained
256: through Constituent Quark Model (CQM). In this context
257: CQM with QCD motivated spin-spin forces \cite{dgg} has been
258: extremely successful in explaining large amount of spin data.
259: This model, apart from providing considerable insight into the
260: hadronic matrix elements is devoid of complicated technicalities
261: from the calculation point of view. For the benefit of the
262: reader, we include herewith a brief sketch of the CQM, so as to
263: enable one to understand simple calculations.
264:
265:
266: \section{The Constituent Quark Model with spin-spin forces}
267:
268: The constituent quark model or naive quark model is based on
269: certain extremely simplifying assumptions. For example, hadrons
270: are made up of point like valence quarks, baryons consisting of
271: three quark combinations, whereas the mesons consisting of
272: quark-antiquark combinations. The valence quark content
273: of some of the baryons and mesons is given in Table 1. These
274: quarks interact through confining potential, several of these
275: have been used, the most popular being Coulombic + linear and
276: the harmonic oscillator. All hadronic transitions take place
277: through single quark transitions: for example, in a given
278: baryon, two out of the three valence quarks would act as
279: spectators, whereas third quark will participate in the
280: interaction. Apart from the confining potential in the
281: CQM, some extra interactions between the quarks have also
282: been considered.
283:
284: To understand the essentials of naive quark model, we discuss
285: in somewhat detail a particular model, pioneered by
286: DGG \cite{dgg}, which has been extremely successful.
287: The starting point for CQM with chromodynamic spin-spin forces
288: is the Hamiltonian,
289:
290: \be
291: H=L(\vec{r_1},\vec{r_2},....)+ \sum_{i}(m_i+
292: \frac{p_i^2}{2 m_i}+....) +\sum_{i>j} k \alpha_s S_{ij}.
293: \label{Ham}
294: \ee
295: In the above equation, $L$ describes the universal interaction
296: responsible for quark binding, $\vec{r_i}, ~\vec{p_i}$ and
297: $m_i$ are the position, momentum and mass of the $i^{th}$ quark,
298: and $k$ is -4/3 for mesons and -2/3 for baryons. $S_{ij}$ is
299: the two-body Coulombic interaction and has the form:
300: \be
301: S_{ij}=\frac{1}{|\vec{r}|} \frac{1}{2 m_i m_j}
302: (\frac{\vec{p_i}.\vec{p_j}}{|\vec{r}|} +
303: \frac{\vec{r_i}.(\vec{r}.\vec{p})}{{|\vec{r}|}^3} -
304: \frac{\pi}{2} {\delta}^3(\vec{r}) (\frac{1}{m_i^2} +
305: \frac{1}{m_j^2} + \frac{16 \vec{S_i}.\vec{S_j}}{3 m_i m_j}) + ....... \label{Sij}
306: \ee
307: where $\vec{r}=\vec{r_i}-\vec{r_j}$ and $S_i$ is the spin of
308: the i$^{th}$ quark. The exact form of the confining potential
309: is not known, however, several kinds of confinement potential
310: have been used in the literature. To illustrate concrete
311: calculations of hadronic matrix elements we use harmonic
312: oscillator potential \cite{dgg} because of its exact
313: solvability and simplicity. The corresponding Hamiltonian
314: can be obtained from Equations (\ref{Ham}) and (\ref{Sij})
315: by replacing H by
316:
317: \be
318: H= \sum_{i}^{3}\frac{p_i^2}{2 m_i}+
319: \frac{1}{6} m \omega^{2} \sum_{i<j}{(r_i-r_j)}^2.
320: \ee
321:
322: The spectrum of hadrons made up of $u$, $d$ and $s$ quarks, in the
323: CQM follows the SU(6)$\times$O(3) symmetry. According to
324: SU(6)$\times$O(3) symmetry, mesons fall into multiplets
325: $(35+1)$. The $35$ containing the nonet of scalar and vector
326: mesons. The baryons fall into the $(56 +{70}^{'} + {70}^{''}
327: + 20)$ representations of $6 \times 6 \times 6$. The
328: extension to hadrons involving heavier quarks c, b and t,
329: can be carried out in the same manner. The O(3) symmetry
330: controls the spatial part of the wavefunction which
331: could be state of definite angular momentum and radial
332: excitations while constructing explicit wavefunctions of CQM.
333: The baryon wavefunction in CQM can be written as
334: \be
335: \psi_{{\rm Baryon}}=\phi_{{\rm unitary ~spin}}~
336: \chi_{{\rm spin}}~ \eta_{{\rm color}}
337: \ee
338: As the quarks are fermion spin 1/2 objects then the total wave
339: function has to be antisymmetric. The wave functions are
340: constructed in such a manner that the antisymmetricity
341: resides in the color space.
342: Baryons and mesons are colorless objects which one ensures by
343: considering them to be color singlets. In the case of mesons
344: this is ensured by the $q-\bar q$ combinations, whereas in the
345: case of baryons this is ensured by taking the wave function
346: completely antisymmetric in color space.
347: We discard the color part of the wavefunction for
348: rest of our discussion as it does not play any dynamical
349: role in the low energy hadronic matrix elements. As an
350: explicit example of the symmetrized wave function in unitary
351: and spin space, we consider the ground state
352: octet of baryons, for which the wave function is expressed as
353:
354: \be
355: \psi_o(8,{\frac{1}{2}}^{+}) = \frac{1}{\sqrt 2}.
356: (\phi^{'} \chi^{'} +\phi^{''} \chi^{''})\psi^s_o,
357: \label{8,1/2}
358: \ee
359: where $\phi$, $\chi$ and $\psi$ denote respectively the SU(3),
360: spin and space wave functions, with the various types of
361: symmetry under quark exchange. For the proton and neutron,
362: we mention the explicit form of $\phi^{'}$, $\chi^{'},
363: \phi^{''}$, $\chi^{''}$, for example,
364: \be
365: \chi^{'} = \frac{1}{\sqrt 2}(\uparrow \downarrow \uparrow
366: -\downarrow \uparrow \uparrow), ~~~
367: \chi^{''}
368: = \frac{1}{\sqrt 6} (2\uparrow \uparrow \downarrow
369: -\uparrow \downarrow \uparrow
370: -\downarrow \uparrow \uparrow),
371: \ee
372: \be
373: {\phi}^{'}_p = \frac{1}{\sqrt 2}(udu-duu),~~~
374: {\phi}^{''}_p = \frac{1}{\sqrt 6}(2uud-udu-duu),
375: \ee
376: \be
377: \phi^{'}_n = \frac{1}{\sqrt 2}(udd-dud),~~~
378: \phi^{''}_n = \frac{1}{\sqrt 6}(udd+dud-2ddu).
379: \ee
380:
381:
382:
383:
384: The spatial wavefunctions, denoted by $\psi$, are solutions
385: of the Hamiltonian. Each level will have definite symmetry
386: and will be associated with the SU(6) to build a symmetric
387: function. The levels and their symmetries are dependent on
388: the potential, generally, the ground-state level is symmetric
389: with $L^P=0^+$, and the next level is of mixed symmetry with
390: $L^P=1^-$. The wavefunctions of the first few spatial states
391: are listed as under. The ground state is given by
392: \be
393: \psi^s(56,0^+)=\psi_0(\rho,\lambda),
394: \ee
395: the N=1 states are as
396:
397: \be
398: \psi^{'}(70,1^{-})={(\frac{8}{3} \pi)}^{1/2} R^{-1} Y^M_1(\rho)
399: \psi_0(\rho,\lambda),
400: \ee
401:
402: \be
403: \psi^{'}(70,1^{-})={(\frac{8}{3} \pi)}^{1/2} R^{-1} Y^M_1(\lambda)
404: \psi_0(\rho,\lambda),
405: \ee
406:
407: where as the N=2 states are
408:
409: \be
410: \psi^{s}(56,0^{+})={(\frac{1}{3})}^{1/2} R^{-2}
411: [3 R^2-(\rho^2+\lambda^2)] \psi_0(\rho,\lambda), \label{s}
412: \ee
413: \be
414: \psi^{'}(70,0^{+})={(\frac{1}{3})}^{1/2} R^{-2}[2 \lambda.\rho)]
415: \psi_0(\rho,\lambda),
416: \ee
417: \be
418: \psi^{''}(70,0^{+})={(\frac{1}{3})}^{1/2} R^{-2}[\rho^2-
419: \lambda^2] \psi_0(\rho,\lambda), \label{''}
420: \ee
421: \be
422: \psi^{''}(70,2^{+})={(\frac{8}{3} \pi)}^{1/2} R^{-2}
423: [Y^M_2(\rho)-Y^M_2(\lambda)] \psi_0(\rho,\lambda).
424: \ee
425: For rest of spatial wavefunctions we refer the reader to
426: reference \cite{yaouanc}.
427: The variables $\rho$ and $\lambda$ are defined as
428: \be
429: \rho =\frac{1}{\sqrt 2}(r_1-r_2), ~~
430: \lambda =\frac{1}{\sqrt 2}(r_1+r_2-2 r_3), ~~
431: R =\frac{1}{3}(r_1+r_2+r_3).
432: \ee
433: $\rho$ being antisymmetric in 1 and 2 and $\lambda$ being
434: symmetric in 1 and 2.
435:
436: Spin-spin forces lead to interband mixing, for example, the
437: octet wavefunction $\psi (8,{\frac{1}{2}}^{+})$ not only gets
438: contribution from the octet $|56,0^+>_{N=0}$ but also
439: from $|56,0^+>_{N=2}, |70,0^+>_{N=2}$ and
440: $|70,2^+>_{N=2}$. Therefore, the nucleon wavefunction is
441: expressed as,
442:
443: \clearpage
444:
445: \[ \psi (8,{\frac{1}{2}}^{+})=|56,0^+>_{N=0}+\alpha |56,0^+>_{N=2}\]
446: \be
447: + \beta |70,0^+>_{N=2}+ \epsilon |70,2^+>_{N=2}. \label{full}
448: \ee
449:
450:
451:
452: Using the above Hamiltonian of DGG, Isgur and Collaborators
453: have carried an extremely detailed analysis of hadronic
454: spectra and hadronic matrix elements. For detailed exposure
455: in this regard we refer the reader to references
456: \cite{{dgg},{yaouanc},{mgupta1},{Isgur1}}. For the special
457: case of nucleon they arrive at the following wave function
458:
459: \[ {\left|8,{\frac{1}{2}}^+ \right>}_n = 0.90 |56,0^+>_{N=0}
460: -0.34 |56,0^+>_{N=2} \]
461: \be
462: -0.27 |70,0^+>_{N=2} - 0.06 |70,2^+>_{N=2}.
463: \ee
464:
465:
466: In Equation(\ref{full}) it should be noted that
467: $(56,0^+)_{N=2}$ does not affect the
468: spin-isospin structure of $(56,0^+)_{N=0}$, whereas
469: $(70,0^+)_{N=2}$ does not affect the spin-isospin structure
470: of $(70,2^+)_{N=2}$. Therefore, Equation(\ref{full}) can be
471: simplified to
472:
473: \begin{equation}
474: \left|8,{\frac{1}{2}}^+ \right> = {\rm cos} \phi |56,0^+>_{N=0}
475: + {\rm sin} \phi|70,0^+>_{N=2}, \label{mixed}
476: \end{equation}
477: with $\phi=20^o$. This has been referred to as non-trivial mixing
478: in the literature{\cite{mgupta1}.
479:
480: This CQM with one gluon mediated $q-q$ and $q-\bar q$ forces
481: have been applied very successfully to large variety of low
482: energy hadronic matrix elements \cite{manohar}. It has not
483: only given a remarkably accurate description of hadron
484: spectroscopy data \cite{Isgur1} but has also been able to
485: describe some very subtle features of the data, such as
486: neutron charge radius \cite{{yaouanc},{em}}, $N-\Delta$ mass
487: difference, photohelicty amplitudes \cite{photo},
488: baryon magnetic moments, etc.
489:
490:
491: To illustrate the success of CQM, in the sequel we discuss
492: two cases, for example, nucleon magnetic moments and neutron
493: charge radius. The magnetic moment for a nucleon is defined as
494: \be
495: \mu(B)=\Delta u^{B} \mu_u+\Delta d^{B} \mu_d+\Delta s^{B} \mu_s,
496: \label{mag}
497: \ee
498: where $\Delta u^{B}, \Delta d^{B}$ and $\Delta s^{B}$
499: for the given nucleon are the spin polarizations defined as:
500: \be
501: \Delta q=q^{\uparrow}-q^{\downarrow},
502: \ee
503: $q^{\uparrow}$ and $q^{\downarrow}$ being the number of quarks
504: with spin up and spin down. The total spin
505: \be
506: \Delta \Sigma = \Delta u + \Delta d +\Delta s,
507: \ee
508: is twice the value of S (spin of proton).
509:
510: Assuming $u$ and $d$ to be point particles, the magnetic moments
511: associated with these ($\mu_u, ~\mu_d$) can be defined as
512: \be
513: \mu_u=\frac{q_u}{2 m_u}=\frac{2}{2 m_N}=2 \mu_N,
514: \ee
515: \be
516: \mu_d=\frac{q_d}{2 m_d}=-\frac{1}{2 m_N}=-\mu_N.
517: \ee
518: Here the masses of $u$ and $d$ quarks are considered to be 1/3 rd of
519: the nucleon mass and are taken to be equal.
520: To find the number of quarks with spin up and spin down,
521: $q^{\uparrow}$ and $q^{\downarrow}$, say in proton, one has to
522: consider the symmetrized wavefunction for the proton given in
523: Equation (\ref{8,1/2}). Let us calculate the number of u
524: quarks with spin up. This can be
525: calculated by considering the expectation value of the operator
526: $n_u(i) P_{\uparrow}(i)$, where i stands for the i$^{th}$ quark
527: and $P_{\uparrow}(i)$ is the projection operator for spin up and
528: is 1 if the i$^{th}$ quark has spin up and 0 otherwise. $n_u(i)$
529: is 1 if the i$^{th}$ quark is $u$ and 0 otherwise. Then,
530: \be
531: u^{\uparrow}= <56, 0^+|\sum_{i=1}^{3} n_u(i) P_{\uparrow}(i)
532: |56, 0^+>.
533: \ee
534: Since the wavefunction in Equation(\ref{8,1/2}) is symmetrized,
535: as well as the operator $n_u(i) P_{\uparrow}(i)$ does not
536: affect the spatial part of the wavefunction, therefore one
537: can write
538: \[ u^{\uparrow}=\frac{3}{2}<\chi^{'} \phi^{'} +
539: \chi^{''} \phi^{''} |n_u(3) P_{\uparrow}(3)|\chi^{'} \phi^{'} +
540: \chi^{''} \phi^{''}>. \]
541: By carrying out simple calculation one finds
542: $u^{\uparrow}=\frac{5}{3}$. Similarly we can find
543: $u^{\downarrow}, d^{\uparrow}$ and $d^{\downarrow}$,
544: for example,
545: \be
546: u^{\downarrow}=\frac{1}{3}, ~~
547: d^{\uparrow}=\frac{1}{3}, ~~ d^{\downarrow}=\frac{2}{3}.
548: \ee
549: This can be repeated for other baryons, for example, in
550: neutron we interchange $u$ and $d$, in $\Sigma^+$ we replace
551: $d$ by $s$ and so on.
552:
553: Thus, the contribution by each of the quark flavors to the
554: proton spin can be written as:
555: \be
556: \Delta u=\frac{4}{3}, ~~\Delta d=-\frac{1}{3},~~
557: \Delta s=0. \label{56}
558: \ee
559: From Equations (\ref{mag}) and (\ref{56}) we get the
560: magnetic moment of the proton and the neutron as,
561: \be
562: \mu(p)=\frac{4}{3} \mu_u-\frac{1}{3} \mu_d, \label{mup}
563: \ee
564: \be
565: \mu(n)=\frac{4}{3} \mu_d-\frac{1}{3} \mu_u. \label{mun}
566: \ee
567: If we substitute $\mu_u=-2 \mu_d$, then we obtain
568: $\frac{\mu_p}{\mu_n}=-\frac{3}{2}$ which is very well in
569: agreement with the experiment. The same thing can be repeated
570: when we use the wavefunction with non-trivial mixing. The
571: magnetic moments are
572:
573: \be
574: \mu(p)={\rm cos}^2 \phi(\frac{4}{3} \mu_u-\frac{1}{3} \mu_d)+
575: {\rm sin}^2 \phi(\frac{2}{3} \mu_u+\frac{1}{3} \mu_d),
576: \ee
577: and
578: \be
579: \mu(n)={\rm cos}^2 \phi(\frac{4}{3} \mu_d-\frac{1}{3} \mu_u)+
580: {\rm sin}^2 \phi(\frac{2}{3} \mu_d+\frac{1}{3} \mu_u).
581: \ee
582: One can calculate magnetic moment of other baryons, and in
583: Table 2, we have presented the results of a particular
584: calculation \cite{mgupta1}.
585:
586:
587: \begin{table}
588: \begin{center}
589: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|} \hline
590: Baryons & Expt. value & CQM without & CQM with \\
591: &&configuration mixing & configuration mixing \\ \hline
592: $\mu(p)$ &2.793 & 3 & 2.766 \\
593: $\mu(n)$ & -1.913 &-2 & -1.766 \\
594: $\mu(\Sigma^+)$ & 2.42 & 2.86 & 2.68 \\
595: $\mu(\Sigma^-)$ & -1.105 & -1.13 & -1.084 \\
596: $\mu(\Xi^o)$ & -1.25 & -1.46 &-1.43 \\
597: $\mu(\Xi^-)$ & -.69 & -.46 &-.66 \\ \hline
598: \end{tabular}
599: \caption{Magnetic moments of baryons in CQM.}
600: \end{center}
601: \end{table}
602:
603: There are large number of hadronic
604: matrix elements which can be calculated and these agree very
605: well with the data. For the sake of readability of the article
606: we include another calculation of CQM which involves calculations
607: of spatial wavefunctions. The neutron charge radius is usually
608: expressed in terms of the slope of the electric form factor
609: $ G_{E}^n(q^2)$, the experimental value {\cite{kopecki}} of
610: which is given as
611:
612:
613: \be (\frac{d G^n_E (q^2)}{d|q^2|})_{q^2=0} =
614: 0.47 \pm 0.01 ~GeV^{-2}.
615: \ee
616:
617: If we assign the nucleon to a pure 56 (with the spin expressed in
618: terms of Pauli spinors ), the neutron electric form factor
619: vanishes for all $q^2$.
620: Considering our complete wavefunction with the $56-70$ mixing and
621: performing the calculations, keeping the lowest order in tan$\phi$,
622: we obtain
623: \be
624: \mu_n\frac{G^n_E (q^2)}{G^n_M (q^2)} = -{\rm tan}\phi {\sqrt 2}
625: <{\psi}^{''}_{N=1}|e^{i {\vec q}.{\vec r_3}}|{\psi}^s>,
626: \ee
627: and from Equations (\ref{s}) and (\ref{''}) we have
628: \be
629: <{\psi}^{''}_{N=1}|e^{i {\vec q}.{\vec r_3}}|{\psi}^s>=
630: \frac{|q^2| R^2}{6 \sqrt 3}.
631: \ee
632: Neutron charge radius can be expressed as
633:
634: \be
635: <r_n^2>= 6 (\frac{d G^n_E (q^2)}{d|q^2|})_{q^2=0} =
636: \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}} R^2 (-{\rm tan} \phi),
637: \ee
638: where $\phi$ is the mixing angle and is negative and $R^2$
639: is the shape factor {\cite{{yaouanc},{mgupta1}} for the
640: harmonic oscillator wave function. The calculated values
641: of neutron charge radius $<r^2_n> (=6b)$ as function of
642: $\phi$ and $R^2$ are presented in Table 3. From the table
643: one can immediately find out that CQM with spin spin forces
644: is able to give an excellent fit to neutron charge radius.
645:
646: \begin{table}
647: \begin{center}
648: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|} \hline
649: & $\phi$ & $R^2 (GeV^{-2})$
650: & $<r_n^2> (GeV^{-2})$ \\ \hline
651: Expt. value & & - & 2.82 \\ \hline
652: & -$20^0$ & 8 & 2.64 \\
653: & & 9 & 2.93 \\
654: & & 10& 3.23 \\
655:
656: Calculated & -$18^0$ & 8 & 2.39 \\
657: values & & 9 & 2.65 \\
658: & &10 & 2.91 \\
659:
660: & -$16^0$ & 10 & 2.61 \\
661: & & 11 & 2.84 \\
662: & & 12 & 3.07 \\ \hline
663:
664:
665: \end{tabular}
666: \caption{Neutron charge radius in CQM.}
667: \end{center}
668: \end{table}
669:
670: \section{Difficulties with CQM}
671:
672: Despite amazing success in explaning large and diverse
673: amount of hadronic data, the basic tenents of CQM raise
674: many questions about their justifications. Neither one can
675: deduce it from basic QCD considerations nor can one provide
676: justification for its basic assumptions. So,
677: from aesthetic considerations it is very unsatisfactory situation.
678:
679:
680: Besides the philosophical inadequacy of CQM, there are a few
681: parameters which have defied explanation within CQM. For example,
682: $G_A/G_V$, defined in terms of the spin distribution functions,
683: is given as
684: \be
685: G_A/G_V=\Delta u-\Delta d. \label{gav}
686: \ee
687: In comparison to the experimental value of 1.26, Equation
688: (\ref{gav}) predicts it to be $\frac{5}{3}$ in the case of CQM.
689: Introduction of configuration mixing
690: does not help much in this case, for example, with a mixing
691: characterised by $\phi=20^o$, $G_A/G_V$ doesn't change much.
692: Similarly, there are several other
693: parameters which require one to go beyond CQM.
694:
695: The most important challenge to CQM was, however, posed by the
696: observations in the deep inelastic scattering of the polarised
697: leptons off polarised nucleons made by the
698: European Muon Collaboration (EMC) \cite{EMC}.
699: The deep inelastic polarized muon-proton scattering measurements
700: made by the EMC indicated that the entire spin of the proton is
701: not carried by the valence quarks but only 30\%
702: of the spin is carried by the valence quarks. It also indicated
703: that the $q \bar q$ sea is not unpolarised and there is a
704: significant contribution to the proton spin by the strange quarks
705: in the sea. This is contrasted with the CQM assumptions that
706: entire spin of the proton is carried by the valence quarks.
707: This was called ``spin crisis''.
708:
709: Further, in CQM, the similarity of the $u$ and $d$ quark masses and
710: the flavor independent nature of the gluon couplings led to
711: expect $\bar d=\bar u$, thus to the validity of the Gottfried
712: sum rule in CQM. The NMC measurements of the muon scatterings
713: off proton and neutron targets \cite{NMC}, however, show that
714: the Gottfried sum rule \cite{GSR} is violated. It has been
715: interpreted as showing $\bar d>\bar u$ in the
716: proton. This conclusion has been confirmed by NA51 \cite{na51}
717: in the Drell-Yan process with
718: proton and neutron targets.
719:
720: From the above discussion it seems that many of the successes of
721: CQM are primarily due to cancellation which are taking place due
722: to various degrees of freedom inside the nucleon.
723: It therefore becomes interesting to introduce components into the
724: wavefunction having angular momentum, a polarized sea of
725: quark-antiquark pairs, gluons and Goldstone bosons etc.
726: In this context we would like to discuss a particular successful
727: model, Chiral Quark Model, which not only incorporates
728: the basic features of CQM but also some other degrees of freedom.
729:
730: \section{Chiral Quark Model ($\chi$QM)}
731:
732: Chiral quark model was developed \cite{{manohar},{wein}}
733: essentially to understand the successes of CQM.
734: The idea of the $\chi$QM is based on the picture that a quark
735: inside a nucleon emits quark-antiquarks pairs via
736: Goldstone bosons (GB), for example,
737: \be
738: q_{\pm} \rightarrow GB^{0}
739: + q^{'}_{\mp} \rightarrow (q \bar q^{'})
740: +q_{\mp}^{'}. \label{gb}
741: \ee
742:
743: \begin{figure}
744: \centerline{\psfig{figure=gb.eps,width=6cm,height=4cm}}
745: \caption{Production of a $q-\bar q$ pair via a Goldstone
746: Boson emission.}
747: \end{figure}
748:
749:
750: The basic interaction causes a modification of the spin content
751: because a quark changes its helicity by emitting a spin zero meson.
752: It causes a modification of the flavor content because the GB
753: fluctuation, unlike gluon emission, is flavor dependent. The spin
754: flip process makes it possible to understand the spin content of the
755: nucleon, which was not possible in the conventional constituent
756: quark model. With the admixture of mesons to the nucleon
757: wavefunction, one finds that only $\frac{1}{3}$rd of the nucleon is
758: carried by the quarks. Moreover, for the other spin-flavor
759: observables, such as magnetic moments, sea quark distributions and
760: the Gottfried sum rule, the agreement with experimental data is
761: also improved using this model. Thus, inside the nucleon, but not
762: deep inside where perturbative QCD is applicable, the
763: effective degrees of freedom are constituent quarks, gluons, the
764: $\chi SB$ Goldstone bosons and the $q-\bar q$ pairs.
765: In order to make the article self contained we reproduce in the
766: sequel some of the essential details of $\chi$QM.
767:
768: The basic idea of $\chi$QM is that the chiral symmetry breaking
769: takes place at a distance significantly smaller than the
770: confinement scale. For example, the QCD confinement scale is
771: characterised by $\Lambda_{QCD}$=0.1-0.3 GeV, whereas the
772: chiral symmetry breaking scale, $\Lambda_{\chi SB}$ is
773: characterised by 1 GeV. The Lagrangian based on the
774: chiral quark model is
775: \be
776: L = g_8 \bar q \phi q, \label{chil}
777: \ee
778: where $g_8$ is the coupling constant,
779: \[ q =\left( \ba{c} u \\ d \\ s \ea \right),\]
780: and
781: \be
782: \phi = \left( \ba{ccc} \frac{\pi^o}{\sqrt 2}
783: +\beta\frac{\eta}{\sqrt 6}+\zeta\frac{\eta^{'}}{\sqrt 3} & \pi^+
784: & \alpha K^+ \\
785: \pi^- & -\frac{\pi^o}{\sqrt 2} +\beta \frac{\eta}{\sqrt 6}
786: +\zeta\frac{\eta^{'}}{\sqrt 3} & \alpha K^o \\
787: \alpha K^- & \alpha \bar{K}^o & -\beta \frac{2\eta}{\sqrt 6}
788: +\zeta\frac{\eta^{'}}{\sqrt 3} \ea \right).
789: \ee
790:
791: SU(3) symmetry breaking is introduced by considering
792: different quark masses $m_s > m_{u,d}$ as well as by considering
793: the masses of Goldstone Bosons to be non-degenerate
794: $(M_{K,\eta} > M_{\pi})$ {\cite{{cheng1},{song},{johan}}}, whereas
795: the axial U(1) breaking is introduced by
796: $M_{\eta^{'}} > M_{K,\eta}$
797: {\cite{{{cheng1},{song},{johan},{cheng}}}.
798: The parameter $a(=|g_8|^2$) denotes the transition probability
799: of chiral fluctuation
800: of the splittings $u(d) \rightarrow d(u) + \pi^{+(-)}$, whereas
801: $\alpha^2 a$ denotes the probability of transition of
802: $u(d) \rightarrow s + K^{-(0)}$.
803: Similarly $\beta^2 a$ and $\zeta^2 a$ denote the probability of
804: $u(d,s) \rightarrow u(d,s) + \eta$ and
805: $u(d,s) \rightarrow u(d,s) + \eta^{'}$, respectively.
806:
807:
808:
809:
810: The effective
811: Lagrangian in the region between $\Lambda_{\chi SB}$ and
812: $\Lambda_{QCD}$ has fundamental quark and gluon fields, because
813: these particles are not bound into color-singlet hadrons at such
814: short distances. Since the $SU(3)_L \times SU(3)_R$ global chiral
815: symmetry is spontaneously broken, there is also an octet of
816: pseudoscalar Goldstone boson, which are put in as fundamental
817: fields. The Goldstone boson fields are essential if the Lagrangian
818: is to consistently reproduce the effects of a spontaneously broken
819: global symmetry.
820: In this energy range the quarks and GBs propagate in the QCD
821: vacuum which is filled with the $q- \bar q$ condensate. The
822: interaction of a quark with the condensate will cause it to
823: gain an extra mass of $\simeq 350$ MeV. This is the $\chi$QM
824: explanation of the large constituent quark mass. The QCD
825: Lagrangian is also invariant under the axial U(1) symmetry,
826: which would imply the ninth GB $m_{\eta^{'}} \simeq m_{\eta}$.
827: But the existence of axial anomaly breaks the symmetry and
828: in this way the $\eta^{'}$ picks up an extra mass.
829:
830: The interaction of the GBs is weak enough to be treated by
831: perturbation theory. This means that on long enough time
832: scales for the low energy parameters to develop we have
833:
834: \[ u^{\uparrow} \rightleftharpoons (d^{\downarrow} + \pi^+) +
835: (s^{\downarrow} + K^+)+(u^{\downarrow} + \pi^o,\eta,\eta^{'}),\]
836:
837: \[ d^{\uparrow} \rightleftharpoons (u^{\downarrow} + \pi^-) +
838: (s^{\downarrow} + K^o)+(d^{\downarrow} + \pi^o,\eta,\eta^{'}),\]
839:
840: \[ s^{\uparrow} \rightleftharpoons (u^{\downarrow} + K^-) +
841: (d^{\downarrow} + \bar K^{o})+(s^{\downarrow} +\eta, \eta^{'}).\]
842:
843: In the absence of interactions, the proton is made up of two
844: $u$ quarks and one $d$ quark. Proton's flavor content can be
845: calculated after any one of these quarks turns into part of
846: the quark sea by `disintegrating', via GB emissions, into a
847: quark plus a quark-antiquark pair.
848:
849: $\chi$QM with SU(3) symmetry ($\alpha= \beta =1$) is
850: also able to provide fairly satisfactory explanation for
851: various quark flavor contributions to the proton spin
852: {\cite{eichten}}, baryon magnetic moments
853: \cite{{cheng},{eichten}} as well as the absence of
854: polarizations of the antiquark sea in the nucleon
855: {\cite{{song},{antiquark}}} . However, in the case of
856: hyperon decay parameters the predictions of the
857: $\chi$QM are not in tune with the data {\cite{decays}},
858: for example, in comparison to the experimental numbers
859: 0.21 and 2.17 the $\chi$QM with SU(3) symmetry predicts
860: $f_3/f_8$ and $\Delta_3/\Delta_8$ to be $\frac{1}{3}$ and
861: $\frac{5}{3}$ respectively. It has been shown
862: {\cite{{song},{cheng}}} that when SU(3) breaking effects are
863: taken into consideration within $\chi$QM, the predictions of
864: the $\chi$QM regarding the above mentioned ratios
865: have much better overlap with the data.
866:
867: However, as mentioned earlier that the constituent quark model
868: with one gluon mediated configuration mixing (CQM$_{gcm}$) gives a
869: fairly satisfactory explanation of host of low energy hadronic
870: matrix elements {\cite{{dgg},{Isgur1},{em}}}.
871: In view of the fact that constituent quarks constitute one of
872: the important degrees of freedom, therefore it becomes interesting
873: to examine, within the $\chi$QM, the implications
874: of one gluon mediated configuration mixing. This is
875: particularly interesting as some of the low energy
876: data are responsive only to configuration mixing.
877:
878:
879: \section{Chiral Quark Model with configuration mixing}
880: In order to make the article self contained we discuss here
881: some of the essential details of the
882: chiral quark model with one gluon generated configuration mixing
883: ($\chi$QM$_{gcm}$), for the
884: details we refer the reader to reference \cite{hd}.
885: To begin with, we consider the spin distribution functions
886: for nucleon wave function affected by spin-spin forces.
887: However, for the sake of simplicity we consider nucleon
888: wave function described by Equation (\ref{mixed}).
889: The spin distribution functions for proton are defined as
890: \[ \left< 8,{\frac{1}{2}}^+|N|8,{\frac{1}{2}}^+\right>={\rm cos}^2
891: \phi <56,0^+|N|56,0^+> \]
892: \be
893: +{\rm sin}^2 \phi<70,0^+|N|70,0^+>.
894: \ee
895: For the $|56>$ part we have
896: \be
897: <56,0^+|N|56,0^+>=\frac{5}{3} u^{\uparrow} +\frac{1}{3}
898: u^{\downarrow}+ \frac{1}{3} d^{\uparrow} +\frac{2}{3}
899: d^{\downarrow},
900: \ee
901: as derived earlier. In the case of $|70>$,
902: one can find the spin in the similar manner and are defined as
903: \be
904: <70,0^+|N|70,0^+>=\frac{4}{3} u^{\uparrow} +\frac{2}{3}
905: u^{\downarrow}+ \frac{2}{3} d^{\uparrow} +\frac{1}{3}
906: d^{\downarrow}.
907: \ee
908:
909:
910: In the $\chi$QM, the basic process is the emission of a Goldstone
911: Boson which further splits into $q \bar q$ pair as mentioned in
912: Equation (\ref{gb}) of the
913: text. Following reference \cite{johan}, the spin structure
914: after one interaction can be obtained by substituting for every
915: quark, for example,
916:
917: \be
918: q^{\uparrow} \rightarrow P_q q^{\uparrow} +
919: |\psi(q^{\uparrow})|^2,
920: \ee
921: where $P_q$ is the probability of no emission of GB from a $q$
922: quark and the probabilities of transforming a $q^{\uparrow
923: \downarrow}$ quark are $|\psi(q^{\uparrow})|^2$, given as
924:
925: \be
926: |\psi(u^{\uparrow})|^2=\frac{a}{6}(3+\beta^2+2 \zeta^2)
927: u^{\downarrow}+ a d^{\downarrow}+a \alpha^2 s^{\downarrow},
928: \ee
929:
930: \be
931: |\psi(d^{\uparrow})|^2=a u^{\downarrow}+
932: \frac{a}{6}(3+\beta^2+2 \zeta^2)d^{\downarrow}+
933: a \alpha^2 s^{\downarrow},
934: \ee
935:
936: \be
937: |\psi(s^{\uparrow})|^2= a \alpha^2 u^{\downarrow}+
938: a \alpha^2 d^{\downarrow}+\frac{a}{3}
939: (2 \beta^2+\zeta^2)s^{\downarrow}.
940: \ee
941: The quantity of interest here is $\hat B$, defined
942: using the above Equations
943:
944:
945: \[ \hat B={\rm cos}^2 \phi \left[ \frac{5}{3}(P_u u^{\uparrow} +
946: |\psi(u^{\uparrow})|^2)+
947: \frac{1}{3}(P_u u^{\downarrow} + |\psi(u^{\downarrow})|^2)+
948: \frac{1}{3}(P_d d^{\uparrow} + |\psi(d^{\uparrow})|^2)
949: \right. \]
950: \[ \left. +\frac{2}{3}(P_d d^{\downarrow} + |\psi(d^{\downarrow})|^2)
951: \right] +{\rm sin}^2 \phi \left[ \frac{4}{3}(P_u u^{\uparrow}
952: +|\psi(u^{\uparrow})|^2)+ \frac{2}{3}(P_u u^{\downarrow}
953: +|\psi(u^{\downarrow})|^2) \right. \]
954: \be
955: \left.
956: +\frac{2}{3}(P_d d^{\uparrow} + |\psi(d^{\uparrow})|^2)+
957: \frac{1}{3}(P_d d^{\downarrow} +
958: |\psi(d^{\downarrow})|^2) \right].
959: \ee
960:
961:
962: \begin{table}
963: \begin{center}
964: {\scriptsize
965: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
966: & & \multicolumn{5}{c|} {Without configuration mixing} &
967: \multicolumn{6}{c|} {With configuration mixing}\\ \cline{3-13}
968: Para- & Expt. & CQM & \multicolumn{2}{c|} {$\chi$QM} &
969: \multicolumn{2}{c|} {$\chi$QM}
970: & $\phi$ & CQM$_{gcm}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|} {$\chi$QM$_{gcm}$}
971: & \multicolumn{2}{c|} {$\chi$QM$_{gcm}$} \\
972: meter & value& & \multicolumn{2}{c|} {with SU(3)} &
973: \multicolumn{2}{c|} {with SU(3)} & & & \multicolumn{2}{c|}
974: {with SU(3)} & \multicolumn{2}{c|} {with SU(3)} \\
975: & & & \multicolumn{2}{c|} {symmetry} &
976: \multicolumn{2}{c|} {symmetry} & &
977: & \multicolumn{2}{c|} {symmetry} &
978: \multicolumn{2}{c|} {symmetry} \\
979: &&&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{}& \multicolumn{2}{c|} {breaking} &&&
980: \multicolumn{2}{c|}{}& \multicolumn{2}{c|} {breaking} \\ \hline
981: & & & NMC & E866 & NMC &E866 & & & NMC & E866 & NMC & E866 \\
982: \cline{4-7} \cline{10-13}
983: & & & & & & & 20$^o$ & 1.26 &
984: .74 & .76 & .90 & .92 \\
985: $\Delta$ u & 0.85 $\pm$ 0.05 & 1.33 & .79 & .81 & .96 & .99 &
986: 18$^o$ & 1.27 &
987: .75 &.77 & .91 & .93 \\
988: & {\cite{adams}} & & & & & & 16$^o$ & 1.28 &
989: .76 & .78 & .92 & .94 \\ \hline
990:
991: & & & & & & & 20$^o$ &
992: -0.26 & -0.30 & -0.31 & -0.32 & -0.34 \\
993: $\Delta$ d & -0.41 $\pm$ 0.05 & -0.33 & -0.35 & -0.37 & -0.40 &
994: -0.41 & 18$^o$ & -0.27 &-0.31 & -0.32 & -0.33 & -0.35 \\
995: & {\cite{adams}} & & & & & & 16$^o$ &
996: -0.28 & -0.32 &-0.33 & -0.34 & -0.36 \\ \hline
997:
998: &&&&&&&&&&&& \\
999: $\Delta$ s &-0.07 $\pm$ 0.05 & 0 & -0.1 & -0.12 & -0.02 &
1000: -0.02 & & 0 & -0.1 & -0.12 & -0.02 &-0.02 \\
1001: & {\cite{adams}} &&&&&&&&&&& \\ \hline
1002:
1003: & & & & & & & 20$^o$ &
1004: 1.52 & 1.04 & 1.07 & 1.22 & 1.26 \\
1005: $G_A/G_V$ & 1.267 $\pm$ .0035 & 1.66 & 1.14 & 1.18 & 1.35 &
1006: 1.40 & 18$^o$ & 1.54 & 1.06 & 1.09 & 1.24 & 1.28 \\
1007: & {\cite{PDG}}& & & & & & 16$^o$ &
1008: 1.56 & 1.08 & 1.11 & 1.26 & 1.30 \\ \hline
1009:
1010:
1011: & & & & & & & 20$^o$ &
1012: 1 & .64 & .69 & .62 & .62 \\
1013: $\Delta_8$ & .58 $\pm$ .025 & 1 & .64 & .68 & .60 & .62 &
1014: 18$^o$ & 1 & .64 & .69 & .62 & .62 \\
1015: & {\cite{PDG1}}& & & & & & 16$^o$ &
1016: 1 & .64 & .69 & .62 & .62 \\ \hline
1017:
1018:
1019: & & & & & & & 20$^o$ & -.26 &
1020: -.20 & -.19 & -.30 & -.32 \\
1021: F-D & -.34 & -.33 & -.25 & -.25 & -.38 & -.39 & 18$^o$
1022: & -.27 &
1023: -.21 & -.20 & -.31 & -.33 \\
1024: & & & & & & & 16$^o$ & -.28 &
1025: -.22 & -.21 & -.32 & -.34 \\ \hline
1026:
1027:
1028: & & & & & & & 20$^o$ & .71 &
1029: .68 & .70 & .61 & .59 \\
1030: F/D & .575 & .67 & .64 & .65 & .56 & .56 & 18$^o$
1031: & .70 &
1032: .67 &.69 & .60 & .58 \\
1033: & & & & & & & 16$^o$ & .69 &
1034: .66 & .68 & .59 & .57 \\ \hline
1035:
1036: & & & & & & & 20$^o$ & .63 &
1037: .42 & .44 & .46 & .47 \\
1038: F & .462 & .665 & .445 & .465 & .49 & .505 & 18$^o$
1039: & .635 &
1040: .425 &.445 & .465 & .475 \\
1041: & & & & & & & 16$^o$ & .64 &
1042: .43 & .45 & .47 & .48 \\ \hline
1043:
1044: & & & & & & & 20$^o$ & .89 &
1045: .62 & .63 & .76 & .79 \\
1046: D & .794 & 1 & .695 & .715 & .87 & .895 & 18$^o$
1047: & .905 &
1048: .635 &.645 & .775 & .805 \\
1049: & & & & & & & 16$^o$ & .920 &
1050: .65 & .66 & .79 & .82 \\ \hline
1051:
1052:
1053: \end{tabular}}
1054: \caption{The calculated values of
1055: spin polarization functions $\Delta u, ~\Delta d, ~\Delta s$,
1056: and quantities dependent on these: $G_A/G_V$ and $\Delta_8$
1057: both for NMC and E866 data with the symmetry breaking
1058: parameters obtained by $\chi^2$ minimization in the $\chi$QM with
1059: one gluon generated configuration mixing ($\chi$QM$_{gcm}$) and
1060: SU(3) symmetry breaking.}
1061: \end{center}
1062: \end{table}
1063:
1064: Using the spin structure from the above Equation
1065: we can calculate the spin polarizations, which come out to be
1066:
1067: \[ \Delta u ={ \rm cos}^2 \phi \left[\frac{4}{3}-\frac{a}{3}
1068: (7+4 \alpha^2+ \frac{4}{3} \beta^2
1069: + \frac{8}{3} \zeta^2)\right] \]
1070: \be
1071: + {\rm sin}^2 \phi \left[\frac{2}{3}-\frac{a}{3} (5+2 \alpha^2+
1072: \frac{2}{3} \beta^2 + \frac{4}{3} \zeta^2)\right],
1073: \ee
1074:
1075: \clearpage
1076:
1077: \[ \Delta d ={\rm cos}^2 \phi \left[-\frac{1}{3}-\frac{a}{3}
1078: (2-\alpha^2- \frac{1}{3}\beta^2- \frac{2}{3} \zeta^2)\right] \]
1079: \be
1080: + {\rm sin}^2 \phi \left[\frac{1}{3}-\frac{a}{3} (4+\alpha^2+
1081: \frac{1}{3} \beta^2 + \frac{2}{3} \zeta^2)\right],
1082: \ee
1083:
1084: \be
1085: \Delta s = {\rm cos}^2 \phi[-a \alpha^2] +
1086: {\rm sin}^2 \phi[-a \alpha^2]= -a \alpha^2.
1087: \ee
1088:
1089: Before we present our results it is perhaps desirable to discuss
1090: certain aspects of the symmetry breaking parameters employed here.
1091: As has been considered by Cheng and Li {\cite{cheng}}, the singlet
1092: octet symmetry breaking parameter
1093: $\zeta$ is related to $\bar u- \bar d$ asymmetry
1094: {\cite{{NMC},{GSR},{E866}}. We have also
1095: taken $\zeta$ to be responsible for the $\bar u-\bar d$ asymmetry
1096: in the $\chi$QM with SU(3) symmetry breaking and configuration
1097: mixing.
1098: Further the parameter $\zeta$ is constrained
1099: \cite{{NMC},{johan},{E866}}
1100: by the expressions $\zeta=-0.7-\beta/2$ and $\zeta=-\beta/2$
1101: for the NMC and E866 experiments respectively, which essentially
1102: represent the fitting of deviation from Gottfried sum rule
1103: {\cite{GSR}}.
1104:
1105:
1106:
1107:
1108: In Table 4, we have presented the results of our calculations
1109: pertaining to spin polarization functions $\Delta u, ~\Delta d,
1110: ~\Delta s$ and related parameters including the hyperon
1111: $\beta$-decay parameters dependent on spin polarizations
1112: functions. The value of the mixing angle is taken to be
1113: $\phi \simeq$ 20$^o$, a value dictated by consideration of
1114: neutron charge radius, as discussed earlier.
1115: In the table, however, we have considered a few
1116: more values of the mixing parameter $\phi$ in order to study
1117: the variation of spin distribution functions with $\phi$.
1118: The parameter $a$ is taken to be 0.1, as considered by other
1119: authors \cite{{song},{johan},{cheng},{eichten}}.
1120: Further, while presenting the results of SU(3) symmetry
1121: breaking case without configuration mixing $(\phi=0^o)$,
1122: we have used the same values
1123: of parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$, primarily to understand
1124: the role of configuration mixing for this case.
1125: The SU(3) symmetry calculations are obtained by taking
1126: $\alpha= \beta=1, \phi=20^o$ and $\alpha= \beta=1, \phi=0^o$
1127: respectively for with and without configuration mixing. For
1128: the sake of completion, we have also presented the results
1129: of CQM with and without configuration mixing.
1130:
1131: In order to appreciate the role of
1132: configuration mixing in affecting the fit, we first compare the
1133: results of CQM with those of CQM$_{gcm}$ {\cite{hd}}.
1134: One observes that
1135: configuration mixing corrects the result of the quantities
1136: in the right direction but this is not to the desirable level.
1137: Further, in order to understand the role of configuration mixing
1138: and SU(3) symmetry with and without breaking in $\chi$QM,
1139: we can compare the results of $\chi$QM with SU(3)
1140: symmetry to those of $\chi$QM$_{gcm}$ with SU(3)
1141: symmetry. Curiously $\chi$QM$_{gcm}$ compares unfavourably with
1142: $\chi$QM in case of most of the calculated quantities.
1143: This indicates that configuration mixing alone is not enough
1144: to generate an appropriate fit in $\chi$QM.
1145: However when $\chi$QM$_{gcm}$ is used with SU(3) and axial
1146: U(1) symmetry breakings then the results show uniform
1147: improvement over the corresponding results of $\chi$QM with
1148: SU(3) and axial U(1) symmetry breakings. To summarize the
1149: discussion of these results, one finds that both configuration
1150: mixing and symmetry breaking are very much needed to fit the
1151: data within $\chi$QM.
1152:
1153: \begin{table}
1154: \begin{center}
1155: {\small
1156: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1157:
1158: Parameter & Expt. & CQM & \multicolumn{2}{c|} {$\chi$QM} &
1159: \multicolumn{2}{c|} {$\chi$QM} \\
1160: & value& & \multicolumn{2}{c|} {with SU(3)} &
1161: \multicolumn{2}{c|} {with SU(3)} \\
1162: & & & \multicolumn{2}{c|} {symmetry} &
1163: \multicolumn{2}{c|} {symmetry} \\
1164: &&&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{}&
1165: \multicolumn{2}{c|} {breaking} \\ \hline
1166: & & & NMC & E866 &
1167: NMC &E866 \\
1168: \cline{4-7}
1169:
1170:
1171: $\bar d-\bar u$ &.147 $\pm$ .024 {\cite{NMC}} & 0 & .147 &
1172: .12 & .147 & .12 \\
1173: & .100 $\pm$ .015 \cite{E866} &&&&& \\
1174:
1175: $\bar u/\bar d$ & 0.51 $\pm$ 0.09 {\cite{baldit}} & 1 & .53 &
1176: .63 & .53 & .63 \\
1177: & 0.67 $\pm$ 0.06 \cite{E866} &&&&& \\
1178:
1179: $I_G$ & .235 $\pm$ .005 {\cite{NMC}}& 0.33 & .235 & .253 &
1180: .235 & .253 \\
1181: &.266 $\pm$ .005 {\cite{E866}} &&&&& \\
1182:
1183: $\frac{2 \bar s}{\bar u+ \bar d}$ & .477 $\pm$ .051 {\cite{ao}} &
1184: &1.9 & 1.66 & .62 & .38 \\
1185:
1186: $\frac{2 \bar s}{u+d}$ & .099 $\pm$ .009 {\cite{ao}} & 0 & .26 &
1187: .25 & .09 & .06 \\
1188:
1189:
1190: $f_s$ & .10 $\pm$ 0.06 {\cite{ao}} & 0 & .19 &
1191: .18 & .07 & .05 \\
1192:
1193:
1194: $f_3/f_8$ & .21 $\pm$ 0.05 {\cite{cheng}} & .33 & .33 & .33 &
1195: .21 & .21 \\
1196: \hline
1197:
1198:
1199:
1200: \end{tabular}}
1201: \caption{The calculated values of quark distribution functions
1202: and other dependent quantities as calculated in the $\chi$QM
1203: with and without SU(3) symmetry breaking both for NMC and E866
1204: data, with the same values of symmetry breaking parameters as
1205: used in spin distribution functions and hyperon
1206: $\beta$ decay parameters.}
1207: \end{center}
1208: \end{table}
1209:
1210:
1211:
1212: In order to have a unified fit to spin polarization
1213: functions as well as quark distribution functions, we have
1214: presented in Table 5 the various quark distribution functions
1215: with the symmetry breaking parameters used in the case of
1216: $\chi$QM with symmetry breaking and configuration mixing both
1217: for NMC and E866 data. The general survey of Table 5
1218: immediately makes it clear that the success achieved in the
1219: case of spin polarization functions is very well maintained in
1220: this case also. The calculated values hardly leave anything to
1221: be desired both for the NMC and E866 data.
1222:
1223: We find that $\chi$QM$_{gcm}$ with SU(3) symmetry breaking is
1224: able to give a satisfactory unified fit for spin and quark
1225: distribution functions, with the symmetry breaking parameters
1226: $\alpha=.4$, $\beta=.7$ and the mixing angle
1227: $\phi=20^o$, both for NMC as well as the most recent E866 data.
1228: In particular, the agreement in the case of
1229: $G_A/G_V, ~\Delta_8$, F, D, $f_s$ and $f_3/f_8$, is quite striking.
1230: It is found that configuration mixing improves the CQM results,
1231: however in the case of $\chi$QM with SU(3) symmetry the results
1232: become worse. The situation changes completely when SU(3) symmetry
1233: breaking and configuration mixing are included simultaneously.
1234: Thus, it seems that both configuration mixing as well as symmetry
1235: breaking are very much needed to fit the data within $\chi$QM.
1236:
1237:
1238:
1239:
1240: \section{Summary and conclusion}
1241: In the last 5 decades there has been phenomenal growth in
1242: the understanding of the question: What is inside the nucleon?
1243: The early 60's saw the emergence of unitary symmetry and
1244: consequently the Quark Model. That quark are point like
1245: constituents of nucleon was formally established by deep
1246: inelastic scattering experiments. The emergence of the
1247: Standard Model as an extension of electroweak unification
1248: laid the foundation of the basic tenants of Quantum
1249: Chromodynamics $-$ the theory describing the $q-q$ and $q-\bar q$
1250: interactions inside the hadrons. QCD being non-Abelian in nature
1251: with non-linear interactions between gluons cannot be solved
1252: exactly in all limits, this gives rise to various effective
1253: models describing the inside of the nucleon for different energy
1254: regions. As has been emphasized earlier, for the low energy
1255: hadronic matrix elements or phenomena involving the surface of
1256: the nucleon, the CQM with QCD inspired spin-spin forces provides a
1257: simplistic but satisfactory description of the data.
1258: Below the surface of the nucleon, in the energy scale
1259: $\Lambda_{QCD}< Q < \Lambda_{\chi QM}$, the effective degrees
1260: of freedom change from constituent quarks to quarks, $q-\bar q$
1261: pairs, gluons and Goldstone bosons. Mathematically,
1262: in this region the wave function of the nucleon is described
1263: by Equation (\ref{chil}). The wavefunction of nucleon in this
1264: region becomes more complicated as it has to incorporate more
1265: degrees of freedom.
1266: The Deep Inelastic region, with the dynamics of the quarks
1267: described by the QCD Lagrangian is given by Equation (\ref{disl}).
1268: The deep inside of the nucleon is characterized by
1269: quarks, gluons, $q-\bar q$ pairs, with hardly any interactions
1270: among themselves.
1271:
1272:
1273:
1274:
1275: %%%%%%%%% IF YOU HAVE PS OR EPS FILES FOR FIGURES%%%%%%%%
1276: %\begin{figure}
1277: %\centerline{\epsfxsize=12cm\epsffile{figure1.eps}}
1278: %\caption{Figure caption}
1279: %\end{figure}
1280:
1281:
1282:
1283:
1284: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1285:
1286: \bibitem{frit} H. Fritzsch and M. Gell-Mann In {\it Proc. 16th
1287: Conf. on High Energy Physics}, Batavia, published by National
1288: Accelerator Laboratory, vol. 2, p. 133(1972).
1289:
1290: \bibitem{koller} K. Koller, H. Krasemann, T.F. Walsh,
1291: Z. Physik {\bf C1}, 71(1979); K. Koller, T.F. Walsh, Phys.
1292: Lett. {\bf 72 B}, 227(1977); {\it ibid} {\bf 73 B}, 504(1978);
1293: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 140}, 449(1978).
1294:
1295: \bibitem{qcd} T.A. de Grand {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev.
1296: {\bf D 16}, 3251(1977); S. Brodsky {\it et al.}, Phys. Lett.
1297: {\bf 73 B}, 203(1978); H. Fritzsch, K.H. Streng, Phys. Lett.
1298: {\bf 74 B}, 90(1978).
1299:
1300: \bibitem{glas} S.L. Glashow Nucl. Phys. {\bf 22}, 579(1961).
1301:
1302: \bibitem{wei} S. Weinberg Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 19}, 1264(1967).
1303:
1304: \bibitem{salam}A. Salam, In {\it Elementary Particle Physics;
1305: Proc 8th Nobel Symp.,} edited by N. Svartholm,
1306: Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksell p. 367(1968).
1307:
1308: \bibitem{pro} Proceedings of the School for Young High Enegry
1309: Physicists, P.M. Watkins, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory,
1310: March 20001.
1311:
1312:
1313: \bibitem{jade} JADE Collaboration, W. Bartel {\it et al.},
1314: Phys. Lett. {\bf 100 B}, 364(1981).
1315:
1316: \bibitem{cello} CELLO Collaboration, H.-J. Behrend {\it et al.},
1317: Phys. Scripta {\bf 23}, 610(1981).
1318:
1319: \bibitem{dgg} A. De Rujula, H. Georgi and S.L. Glashow,
1320: Phys. Rev. {\bf D 12}, 147(1975).
1321:
1322:
1323: \bibitem{yaouanc} A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, O. Pene and
1324: J.C. Raynal, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 12}, 2137(1975); {\it ibid}.
1325: {\bf D 15}, 844(1977).
1326:
1327: \bibitem{mgupta1} M. Gupta and N. Kaur,
1328: Phys. Rev. {\bf D 28}, 534(1983); M. Gupta, J. Phys. G:
1329: Nucl. Phys. {\bf 16}, L213(1990).
1330:
1331: \bibitem{Isgur1} N. Isgur and G. Karl, Phys. Lett. {\bf 72B},
1332: 109(1977); {\it ibid}. {\bf 74B}, 353(1978); Phys. Rev. {\bf D 18},
1333: 4187(1978); {\it ibid}. {\bf D 19}, 2653(1979); {\it ibid}.
1334: {\bf D 21}, 3175(1980);
1335: K.T. Chao, N. Isgur and G. Karl, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 23},
1336: 155(1981); N. Isgur {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 35},
1337: 1665(1987); P. Geiger and N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 55},
1338: 299(1997) and references therein.
1339:
1340: \bibitem{manohar} A. Manohar and H. Georgi, Nucl. Phys.
1341: {\bf B 234}, 189(1984).
1342:
1343: \bibitem{em} M. Gupta and A.N. Mitra, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 18},
1344: 1585(1978); N. Isgur {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 23},
1345: 163(1981); A. Sharma, M. Gupta and M.P. Khanna,
1346: J. Phys. G: Nucl. Phys. {\bf 10}, L241(1984); P.N. Pandit,
1347: M.P. Khanna and M. Gupta, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Phys. {\bf 11},
1348: 683(1985); N. Isgur {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev.
1349: {\bf D 35}, 1665(1987).
1350:
1351:
1352: \bibitem{photo} M. Gupta, S. Sood and A.N. Mitra, Phys. Rev.
1353: {\bf D 16}, 216(1977); {\it ibid.} {\bf D 19}, 104(1979);
1354: M. Gupta and S. Kanwar, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 25}, 1194(1982);
1355: P.N. Pandit, M. Gupta and A. Prasher, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 26},
1356: 565(1982).
1357:
1358: \bibitem{kopecki} S. Kopecki et.al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 74},
1359: 2427(1995).
1360:
1361:
1362: \bibitem{EMC} J. Ashman {\it et al.}, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 206},
1363: 364(1998); Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 328}, 1(1990).
1364:
1365:
1366: \bibitem{NMC} New Muon Collaboration, P. Amaudruz {\it et al.},
1367: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 66}, 2712(1991); M. Arneodo {\it et al.},
1368: Phys. Rev. {\bf D 50}, R1(1994).
1369:
1370: \bibitem{GSR} K. Gottfried, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 18}, 1174(1967).
1371:
1372: \bibitem{na51} NA51 Collaboration, A. Baldit {\it et al.},
1373: Phys. Lett. {\bf B 332}, 244(1994).
1374:
1375:
1376: \bibitem{wein} S. Weinberg, Physica {\bf A 96}, 327(1979).
1377:
1378: \bibitem{cheng1} T.P. Cheng and L.F. Li, Phys. Rev.
1379: {\bf D 57}, 344(1998).
1380:
1381: \bibitem{song} X. Song, J.S. McCarthy and H.J. Weber, Phys. Rev.
1382: {\bf D 55}, 2624(1997); X. Song, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 57}, 4114(1998);
1383: hep-ph/9802206, 9910515, 9910539 and references therein.
1384:
1385: \bibitem{johan} J. Linde, T. Ohlsson and Hakan Snellman,
1386: Phys. Rev. {\bf D 57}, 452(1998).
1387:
1388:
1389: \bibitem{cheng} T.P. Cheng and L.F. Li, Phys. Rev. Lett.
1390: {\bf 74}, 2872(1995).
1391:
1392:
1393:
1394: \bibitem{eichten} E.J. Eichten, I. Hinchliffe and C. Quigg,
1395: Phys. Rev. {\bf D 45}, 2269(1992).
1396:
1397:
1398:
1399:
1400: \bibitem{antiquark} S.J. Brodsky and B.Q. Ma, Phys. Lett.
1401: {\bf B 381}, 317(1996); SMC Collaboration, B. Adeva,
1402: {\it et al.}, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 369}, 93(1996).
1403:
1404:
1405:
1406: \bibitem{decays} J.Ellis and R.L. Jaffe, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 9};
1407: 1444(1974); R.L. Jaffe, Phys. Today. {\bf 48}(9), 24(1995).
1408:
1409: \bibitem{hd} H. Dahiya and M. Gupta, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 64};
1410: 014013(2001).
1411:
1412:
1413:
1414: \bibitem{E866} E866/NuSea Collaboration, E.A. Hawker {\it et al.},
1415: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 80}, 3715(1998); J.C. Peng {\it et al.},
1416: Phys. Rev. {\bf D 58}, 092004(1998).
1417:
1418: \bibitem{adams} P. Adams {\it et al.},
1419: Phys. Rev. {\bf D 56}, 5330(1997).
1420:
1421: \bibitem{PDG} Particle Data Group, D.E. Groom {\it et al.},
1422: Eur. Phys. Jour. {\bf C15}, 1(2000).
1423:
1424:
1425: \bibitem{PDG1} Particle Data Group, R.M. Barnett {\it et al.},
1426: Phys. Rev. {\bf D 54}, 1(1996).
1427:
1428:
1429: \bibitem{baldit} A. Baldit {\it et al.}, NA51 Collaboration,
1430: Phys. Lett. {\bf B 253}, 252(1994).
1431:
1432: \bibitem{ao} A.O. Bazarko, {\it et al.}, Z. Phys {\bf C 65},
1433: 189(1995); J. Grasser, H. Leutwyler and M.E. Saino,
1434: Phys. Lett. {\bf B 253}, 252(1991);
1435: S.J. Dong {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 75}, 2096(1995).
1436:
1437:
1438:
1439: \end{thebibliography}
1440:
1441: \end{document}
1442:
1443: