1: % arXiv version
2: \documentstyle[preprint,tighten,12pt,aps]{revtex}
3:
4: \begin{document}
5:
6: \input{psfig.sty}
7:
8: \title{Beyond the Constituent Quark Model
9: \footnote{Based on a plenary talk presented at Hadrons 2001, Aug 25 - Sept 1, Protvino, Russia.}}
10:
11: \author{Eric S. Swanson}
12:
13: \address{
14: Department of Physics and Astronomy,
15: University of Pittsburgh,
16: Pittsburgh, PA 15260\\
17: and Jefferson Lab, 12000 Jefferson Ave,
18: Newport News, VA 23606}
19:
20: \maketitle
21:
22: \begin{abstract}
23: Modern experiment requires a reliable theoretical framework for low energy
24: QCD. Some of the requirements for constructing a new model of QCD are presented
25: here. Progress toward these requirements are highlighted.
26: \end{abstract}
27:
28:
29:
30: \section{Introduction}
31:
32: The constituent quark model has a long and distinguished history of service to
33: hadronic physics\cite{cqm}. However, its utility is restricted to quark-number conserving
34: hadronic processes -- it has nothing to say about channel coupling, or about gluonic
35: physics in general. And its connection to QCD is tenuous at best.
36: Indeed, it is clear that
37: present day experiment is outstripping theory and that new reliable and tractable continuum
38: models of QCD are required to interpret and guide the new generation of hadronic experiments.
39:
40: For example, it is very likely that resonant structure is seen in the exotic $J^{PC} = 1^{-+}$
41: channel at 1600 MeV; and something is seen at 1400 MeV at BNL, CERN, and VES. Proving that these
42: states are mesonic hybrids will require a substantial improvement in our understanding of
43: the dynamics of soft glue, both in terms of the structure of the putative resonance and in terms
44: of its coupling to `canonical' mesons. Similarly, it is tempting to interpret the extensive
45: Crystal Barrel data on the $f_0(1500)$ as evidence for a scalar glueball. However, state mixing in
46: the scalar sector is notorious for its strength and its obscurity. This mixing must be
47: thoroughly mastered before we can claim the discovery of a glueball and this task will require
48: a reliable model of soft glue. As a final example, consider the extraction of baryonic resonance
49: parameters from Jefferson Lab, BNL, GRAAL, and Bonn. At modern energies, one must analyse data
50: using coupled channel methods; thus $\pi N$, $\pi\pi N$, $\pi\pi\pi N$, $\eta N$, $\rho N$, etc
51: channels become important and one must have a trustworthy method to parameterise the couplings between
52: the different channels.
53: It will also become increasingly important to have reliable estimates of background amplitudes.
54: A moments' reflection reveals that this is a difficult problem in strong QCD: quark exchange diagrams
55: contribute, but may also be present at the effective meson-exchange level. More perplexing is the
56: possibility of quark-antiquark annihilation to intermediate states with excited gluonic content\footnote{There is compelling evidence for this in meson-meson and meson-baryon scattering data\cite{hir}.}.
57:
58: Although these examples were drawn from the mainstream of hadron spectroscopy, it should be
59: stressed that these issues are rather far reaching. For example, extracting electroweak
60: phases will require reliable knowledge of strong phases which are generated in the necessarily
61: present hadronic final states. Analyzing forthcoming RHIC data for putative signals of
62: the quark-gluon plasma will require a careful subtraction of hadronic scattering background
63: which may mask the signal. Again, a thorough knowledge of hadronic dynamics is needed.
64:
65: Of course, more fundamental reasons exist for building a new model of strong QCD. QCD is a
66: remarkably rich theory, displaying such diverse phenomena as spontaneous chiral symmetry
67: breaking, asymptotic freedom, colour confinement, possible new high temperature phases
68: of matter, and important topological features. It would be remiss to abrogate the
69: responsibility of learning as much as possible about these phenomena.
70:
71: \section{Issues Facing a Modern Constituent Quark Model}
72:
73: A short and incomplete list of the issues facing the construction of a `new' quark model
74: follow.
75:
76: \vskip .3 true cm
77: \noindent
78: $\bullet\ ${\sl\bf the nature of confinement}
79:
80: For several decades, the quark model has employed a linear (or similar) static long range
81: interquark potential.
82: While this is in accord with lattice data, many open issues remain. For example, what is the
83: colour space structure of the long range force? This is required even for heavy quarks. The
84: standard choice is $\lambda\cdot \lambda$ and this has received strong support from the lattice\cite{casimir}. It is also possible to prove that this is the correct colour structure in the heavy
85: quark limit\cite{ss7}. The extrapolation to light quark masses remains an open issue. Note that
86: the colour structure is important when one considers hadronic interactions (ie., processes with
87: more than three valence quarks).
88:
89: The Lorentz structure of confinement is not determined by Wilson loop calculations and is
90: important for those wishing to `relativise' quark models. Indications from heavy quarkonium
91: spin splittings and from direct lattice computations are that the structure is {\tt scalar}$\otimes${\tt scalar}\cite{scalar}. However, it should be remembered that this is the form of the {\em effective} interquark interaction once gluons are integrated out of the theory/model. Indeed,
92: comparison with QCD in Coulomb gauge shows that the Lorentz structure of confinement is
93: {\tt vector}$\otimes${\tt vector} in the heavy quark limit\cite{ss5}, and that the effective scalar
94: interaction arises due to nonperturbative mixing with intermediate hybrids.
95:
96: \begin{figure}[h]
97: \hbox to \hsize{\hss\psfig{figure=V140.eps,width=5.5in}\hss}
98: %\includegraphics[height=.3\textheight]{V140.ps}
99: \caption{The leading Tamm-Dancoff Static Potential (line) compared to the
100: Wilson loop confinement potential (points).}
101: \end{figure}
102:
103: An important, and almost uniformly ignored, aspect of model building is deriving the long range
104: confinement potential. While it is tempting to merely assume that confinement exists and to
105: take its form from the lattice, this risks missing vital aspects of strong QCD because
106: confinement is strongly tied to the vacuum
107: structure of QCD, and therefore is related to the appearance of chiral symmetry breaking and
108: constituent quarks (see `chiral pions' below). All three of these phenomena are central features
109: of low energy hadronic physics and must be modelled reasonably well before we can have full
110: confidence in the new quark model. That this ambitious goal is possible has recently been
111: demonstrated twice: with the Schwinger Dyson formalism in Landau gauge\cite{axial}, and with Hamiltonian methods in Coulomb gauge\cite{ss7}. The result of the latter calculation is shown in Fig. 1.
112:
113:
114:
115: \vskip .3 true cm
116: \noindent
117: $\bullet\ ${\sl\bf gluodynamics}
118:
119: Glue, and especially the dynamics of glue, is conspicuously absent from most present
120: day models of strong QCD. It is clear that glue plays a vital role in many aspects
121: of low energy hadronic physics. Indeed, about the only place where it is relatively safe
122: to neglect QCD gluodynamics is when discussing the static properties of mesons and baryons.
123: Thus, for example, a reliable model of gluodynamics is required to address simple questions
124: such as the masses and static properties of glueballs and hybrids. Just as important is the
125: way in which these states couple to `canonical' matter. This must be known if we are to
126: disentangle exotics from the canonical spectrum. Again the lattice will be of great assistance.
127: Lattice computations of glueball masses\cite{Morningstar:1999rf} serve as a litmus test for
128: any putative models of gluodynamics. Furthermore, high precision computations of the
129: adiabatic excited gluon energies provide our first glimpse into the dynamics of strongly
130: interacting glue\cite{JKM}.
131:
132: \vskip .3 true cm
133: \noindent
134: $\bullet\ ${\sl\bf unquenching the quark model}
135:
136: A closely related issue is going beyond the valence approximation in hadronic phenomenology.
137: While it is clear that this is a pressing issue for the investigation of nonvalence physics,
138: such as the strangeness content of the proton\cite{gi}, or the perplexing robustness of the
139: OZI rule in the face of hadronic loops\cite{gi2}, it is also relevant to spectroscopy.
140: Typical hadronic widths of 150 MeV point to typical hadronic mass shifts of a similar scale.
141: Furthermore, meson loops cause spin splittings which can confound simple attempts at deriving
142: these. It is clear that a quark model which unifies quark-antiquark pair creation with
143: valence physics is required\cite{pz}.
144:
145: Although there are a number of technical issues which need to be overcome to achieve this
146: unification (such as efficiently solving coupled channel problems, determining the optimal
147: number of channels to include in a given problem, and accounting for excluded channels), the
148: main issue is the form of the quark creation operator. Certainly this operator is dominated
149: by nonperturbative glue, but a detailed microscopic description is lacking. The most popular
150: model to date is the $^3P_0$ model\cite{3p0} (first diagram in Fig. 2) which assumes an
151: effective vertex which produces
152: quark pairs with vacuum quantum numbers. This model produces a reasonably reliable
153: phenomenology\cite{3p02}.
154:
155:
156: Other possible decay mechanisms exist and need to be explored. For example, the
157: second diagram in Fig. 2 is the leading diagram in naive perturbation
158: theory. However predictions of the D/S amplitude ratios (which are sensitive to the
159: assumed Lorentz structure of the decay vertex) in $b_1 \to \omega \pi$ and $a_1 \to
160: \rho\pi$ strongly prefer a $^3P_0$ pair creation over
161: $^3S_1$\cite{3s1}.
162:
163: \begin{figure}[h]
164: \hbox to \hsize{\hss\psfig{figure=decays.ps,width=5in}\hss}
165: %\includegraphics[height=.1\textheight]{decays.ps}
166: \caption{Possible decay mechanisms.}
167: \end{figure}
168:
169: Another possible decay mechanism is obtained by isolating the instantaneous portion of
170: diagram 2 (diagram 3 of Fig. 2) -- say by working in radiation gauge. However, a model examination
171: of this process reveals that it is strongly suppressed with respect to the $^3P_0$
172: vertex\cite{Ackleh:1996yt}.
173:
174: A promising approach to hadronic properties is provided by the Schwinger-Dyson formalism.
175: The leading decay mechanism in this approach is the triangle diagram\cite{SDdecay} (last diagram of
176: Fig. 2). This method has the benefit of employing the same kernel to describe quark-quark
177: interactions and quark-antiquark pair production. However, this may be too restrictive since
178: vector pair creation appears to be disfavoured by the $b_1$ and $a_1$ amplitude ratios. Nevertheless
179: it is possible that the situation may be saved by the relativistic character of the Schwinger-Dyson
180: approach (certainly, this physics is not explored in the quark model calculations which
181: favour the $^3P_0$ mechanism).
182:
183: The final possibility considered here is the production of a $q\bar q$ pair directly from
184: the confinement potential/flux tube (fourth diagram, Fig. 2). This diagram is a leading term
185: in Coulomb gauge QCD\cite{ss7}. Although the phenomenology of decays in Coulomb gauge QCD
186: has not been explored, it is promising because this diagram yields a vertex with $^3P_0$
187: quantum numbers, and would be our first microscopic justification of the $^3P_0$ model.
188:
189:
190: Given the importance of unquenching the quark model and the paucity of our knowledge of the
191: nonperturbative nature of quark pair creation,
192: {\it a lattice exploration of the form of the decay vertex should be a high priority topic
193: in the near future.}
194:
195:
196:
197:
198: \vskip .3 true cm
199: \noindent
200: $\bullet\ ${\sl\bf chiral pions}
201:
202: Pions are an important part of any attempt to understand strong QCD. As the lightest hadrons
203: they dominate nuclear physics; pion cloud effects are important, and pions are ubiquitous
204: in final states of many hadronic experiments. Having a firm grip on their qualities is of
205: central importance to constructing viable models of strong QCD.
206:
207: It is often said that the constituent quark model view of pions as quark-antiquark
208: bound states is in conflict with their quasiGoldstone boson nature. However, these two
209: world-views need not be at odds. For example, the very existence of the constituent quark
210: model is due to the existence of light pions: the dynamics which causes dynamical symmetry
211: breaking (and Goldstone bosons) also creates quark-like quasiparticle excitations -- the
212: constituent quarks\cite{chiral}. A recent paper\cite{ss6}, show explicitly how the Goldstone,
213: collective, nature of the pion can coexist with the $q\bar q$ bound state quark model pion;
214: briefly, both descriptions are correct when the appropriate degrees of freedom are
215: employed (partonic for the Goldstone modes; constituent for the quark model states). Thus it
216: is likely that a good phenomenology may be obtained simply by ignoring the underlying chiral
217: aspects of the pion. However, incorporating the physics of chiral symmetry breaking is important
218: if one wishes to deal with aspects of the QCD vacuum or if the model is strongly constrained
219: (so that pionic fluctuations into many-quark Fock components may not be absorbed into
220: model parameters).
221:
222:
223: \vskip .3 true cm
224: \noindent
225: $\bullet\ ${\sl\bf relativity}
226:
227: This is a longstanding and well known problem with the constituent quark model which is
228: a left-over from the early days of hadronic physics. There is really no reason to continue
229: with nonrelativistic approaches (except that they are computationally simple and they work
230: reasonably well!) -- and several groups have mounted efforts to construct `relativised' quark
231: models. These typically fall into two categories, light cone/Bakamjian Thomas models\cite{lc}
232: or Schwinger Dyson/Bethe Salpeter models\cite{SD}. The latter are closer to field theory (or
233: {\it are} truncated field theory) and offer great hope.
234:
235: It is possible to overstate the case for covariance. Any nonperturbative approach must
236: break covariance
237: at some level, for example, the lattice breaks Lorentz invariance by working on a grid and
238: models typically must truncate at some level in Fock space. Both of these problems may be
239: removed in principle -- in practice they are {\it not} removed, but the effects may be checked and
240: are seen to be small (at least in the case of lattice gauge theory). It is perhaps more useful to
241: adopt a practical attitude, for example, it would be useful if the computation of the
242: pion decay constant via the PCAC relation $\langle 0 | A_\mu^a(0)|\pi^b(p)\rangle = i f^{ab} p_\mu$
243: did {\it not} depend on the spacetime index.
244:
245:
246: \vskip .3 true cm
247: \noindent
248: $\bullet\ ${\sl\bf short distance dynamics}
249:
250: It is easy to believe that the form of the short distance quark interaction is resolved
251: by QCD; short distance means high $Q^2$, that means small $\alpha_s$, and that means
252: perturbative one gluon exchange. The phenomenology of one gluon exchange works extremely
253: well\cite{oge1} and has the virtue of providing a good phenomenology for both mesons and
254: baryons\cite{oge2}. However the {\it transition}
255: of one gluon exchange to intermediate or large distance is typically ignored. Indeed, in
256: bound state perturbation theory (which is the way all perturbation theory for hadronic
257: physics should be performed), the diagram corresponding to one gluon exchange (first diagram
258: of Fig. 3) corresponds to mixing with intermediate hybrids (second diagram, Fig. 3), and the first diagram does not occur. However, if one is dealing with a
259: field theory, the first diagram reappears as a counterterm which is active
260: at momentum transfer above the renormalization scale.
261: How these
262: two evolve into each other is therefore an issue dealt with by the renormalization group flow of the
263: underlying field theory and should be properly addressed in a new quark model.
264:
265: This issue
266: is related to a subtlety in most quark models: how are short range and
267: long range dynamics to be merged? If confinement arises from multiple gluon
268: exchange, surely it is not correct to simply add one gluon exchange to
269: an assumed linear potential.
270: Addressing this issue is very difficult in covariant gauges, however, in Coulomb
271: gauge there is a natural separation of instantaneous and transverse potentials
272: which allows the issue to be resolved simply.
273:
274: \begin{figure}[h]
275: \hbox to \hsize{\hss\psfig{figure=oge.ps}\hss}
276: %\includegraphics[height=.1\textheight]{oge.ps}
277: \caption{Possible short distance interactions.}
278: \end{figure}
279:
280: The last diagram of Fig. 3 represents meson exchange contributions to the quark interaction.
281: If one admits that pion (and meson) loops can affect hadron properties (as we have argued above)
282: then one must allow these sort of diagrams. However, it is an open issue as to how important
283: they are. Robson examined this possibility years ago\cite{DR} in the context of the tensor
284: splitting of the $S_{11}(1535)$ and $S_{11}(1650)$ and rejected it. It has since been
285: taken up again\cite{GR}, although not without criticism\cite{Isgur:2000jv}.
286:
287:
288:
289:
290: \vskip .3 true cm
291: \noindent
292: $\bullet\ ${\sl\bf topological aspects}
293:
294: Shortly after the notion of topology (here we focus on instantons) was introduced to QCD,
295: 't Hooft used instantons to resolve the $U_A(1)$ problem\cite{inst} -- namely that
296: the axial symmetry of (massless) QCD is not realized in the Wigner-Weyl or Nambu-Goldstone
297: modes. It has also been argued that collective effects involving infinitely many instantons
298: may generate the quark condensate, and hence, chiral symmetry breaking. Finally, we mention
299: that instantons induce an effective quark interaction, however it appears that this force
300: does not confine\cite{SS}.
301:
302: If we are to accept the instanton resolution to the $U_A(1)$ problem, then instanton field
303: configurations must be accepted as an important subset of the vacuum field configurations,
304: and their effects should be included in a new quark model. Indeed, computations with
305: instanton models indicate that they may successfully describe many properties of light
306: hadrons\cite{SS}. There is also lattice evidence that instantons dominate the vacuum.
307: We note, however, that old arguments of Witten against instantons\cite{W} have been
308: resurrected\cite{Horvath:2001ir}. This paper, in turn, has been criticised\cite{cc}.
309:
310: There appears to be little room for instantons in the nonrelativistic constituent quark model,
311: they simply aren't needed to explain the spectrum. However, if instantons do dominate low
312: energy QCD, they must be incorporated into models. The Bonn group (see Refs. \cite{SD,SDdecay})
313: has been developing a model which includes instanton-induced quark interactions in a
314: relativistic Bethe-Salpeter approach, and the resulting phenomenology appears quite successful.
315:
316: Moving beyond the phenomenological stage requires incorporating the effects
317: of instantons in a way which is consistent with the new quark model's treatment
318: of the vacuum. And this means that a consistent treatment of confinement,
319: chiral symmetry breaking, and instanton effects must be found. I know of no
320: attempts in this direction, and it forms a major challenge for future efforts.
321:
322:
323: \vskip .3 true cm
324: \noindent
325: $\bullet\ ${\sl\bf hadronic interactions}
326:
327: Hadronic interactions form an important, if under-appreciated, portion of
328: hadronic physics. They are central to developing a microscopic theory
329: of nuclear physics, to nuclear astrophysics, to the analysis of `background'
330: in $N^*$ and other resonance (hybrids, glueballs) experiments, and to
331: electroweak experiments (where hadronic
332: final state interactions must be properly accounted for). As such, any new quark model
333: should carry with it a well-defined, tractable, methodology for computing
334: hadronic interactions.
335:
336: The present state of affairs is less than ideal. Constituent quark model
337: calculations date from the '70s\cite{lib}, and continue today with
338: resonating group\cite{rg} and perturbative\cite{BS} methods (see Fig. 4).
339: While it is
340: likely that these quark model calculations provide reasonable guidance at
341: low energies (except for pion-dominated physics where one must hope that
342: the necessary chiral properties are captured in the quark model -- see the
343: discussion above), it is less clear how applicable they are at high
344: momentum transfer. It is here that light cone approaches\cite{LC} are
345: expected to be applicable (certainly to inclusive reactions, less certainly
346: to exclusive). Of course what is needed is a consistent formalism which
347: allows the computation of hadronic wavefunctions and hadronic scattering
348: in all energy regimes simultaneously. It is evident that close contact with
349: QCD needs to be maintained if these goals are to be achieved.
350:
351:
352: \begin{figure}[h]
353: \hbox{
354: \psfig{figure=qbd.ps}
355: %\includegraphics[height=.1\textheight]{qbd.ps}
356: \qquad\qquad\qquad
357: \psfig{figure=dipole.ps} }
358: %\includegraphics[height=.1\textheight]{dipole.ps}}
359: \caption{Hadronic Interactions. The left figure is a basic diagram in
360: light cone and perturbative quark model computations of hadronic interactions.
361: It also provides the kernel in resonating group methods. The right figure
362: is assumed to dominate the interaction of a small meson with an external
363: colour field.}
364: \end{figure}
365:
366:
367: One attempt in this regard was made many years ago by
368: Peskin\cite{Bhanot:1979vb}. This approach is essentially a multipole
369: expansion of the interaction of a small colour singlet state with an external
370: colour field (see Fig. 4). The resulting dipole interaction is assumed to be
371: applicable to hadron-hadron interactions as well. However, we note
372: that one prediction of this model is that the cross section for $\psi'$ with
373: hadronic matter is 5000 times larger than that of $\psi$s. Indeed, Peskin
374: fears that even the $\Upsilon$ system may be too light for the method to work\cite{p2}.
375:
376:
377: The historical litmus test for hadronic models has been a computation
378: of the hadron spectrum. It is becoming increasingly clear that this is
379: inadequate because the extraction of resonance parameters is fraught
380: with ambiguity. Computations which are closer to the data are
381: required -- in particular reaction dynamics need to be incorporated
382: into new quark model predictions. This field is in its infancy; however,
383: it has started\cite{SL}.
384:
385:
386: \section{Conclusions}
387:
388:
389:
390: A crucial aspect of the new quark model is a thorough understanding of the
391: QCD vacuum. This is required to meet many of the issues raised above:
392: chiral symmetry breaking, confinement, topology, and gluodynamics. These
393: issues, in turn, are central to developing a viable model of low energy
394: QCD.
395: It will clearly be a stiff challenge to develop a model which adequately
396: addresses all of these issues; however, hadronic physics provides our
397: only window into strongly interacting field theory and is a vital
398: component of nuclear physics, astrophysics, cosmology, and
399: physics beyond the standard model\cite{Capstick}. It will therefore
400: be worth the effort to develop such a model!
401:
402:
403: An efficient description of hadronic physics will require the identification
404: of appropriate degrees of freedom -- constituent quarks, massive gluons,
405: flux tubes, instantons, vortices, or something new. However, if the ambitious goals
406: laid out here are to be achieved, a direct connection of these degrees
407: of freedom to QCD must be maintained.
408: We can take heart that progress is being made. Of particular note is the
409: assistance of lattice gauge theory, which promises to be a useful
410: shortcut to the development of new ideas and to testing these ideas.
411:
412:
413:
414: \begin{references}
415:
416: \bibitem{cqm} M. Gell-Mann, Phys. Lett. {\bf 8}, 214 (1964); G. Zweig, CERN preprints TH401 and
417: TH412 (1964), Proceedings of Baryon 1980, pg. 439 (Ed. N. Isgur); Morpugo, J. Phys. {\bf 2}, 95
418: (1965); R. Dalitz, {\sl Eighth International Conference on High Energy Physics}, Berkeley, (1966).
419:
420: \bibitem{hir}
421: %\bibitem{Swanson:2001sb}
422: E.~S.~Swanson,
423: ``Hadron hadron interactions in the constituent quark model: Results and extensions,''
424: hep-ph/0102267.
425: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0102267;%%
426:
427:
428: \bibitem{casimir} G.S. Bali, Phys. Rev. {\bf D62}, 114503 (2000).
429:
430: %\cite{Szczepaniak:2001rg}
431: \bibitem{ss7}
432: A.~P.~Szczepaniak and E.~S.~Swanson,
433: %``Coulomb gauge QCD, confinement, and the constituent representation,''
434: hep-ph/0107078, to appear Phys. Rev. D.
435: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0107078;%%
436:
437: \bibitem{scalar} H.J. Schnitzer, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 35}, 1540 (1975).
438:
439:
440: %\cite{Szczepaniak:1997tk}
441: \bibitem{ss5}
442: A.~P.~Szczepaniak and E.~S.~Swanson,
443: %``On the Dirac structure of confinement,''
444: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 3987 (1997).
445: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9611310;%%
446:
447: \bibitem{axial}
448: D. Atkinson and J.C.R. Bloch, Phys. Rev.d {\bf D58}, 094036 (1998); L. von Smekal,
449: A. Hauck, and R. Alkofer, Ann. Phys. {\bf 267}, 1 (1998).
450:
451:
452: %\cite{Morningstar:1999rf}
453: \bibitem{Morningstar:1999rf}
454: C.~J.~Morningstar and M.~J.~Peardon,
455: %``The glueball spectrum from an anisotropic lattice study,''
456: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60}, 034509 (1999).
457: %[arXiv:hep-lat/9901004].
458: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9901004;%%
459:
460: \bibitem{JKM}
461: K.J. Juge, J. Kuti, and C.J. Morningstar, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. {\bf 63}, 326 (1998).
462:
463: %\cite{Geiger:1997re}
464: \bibitem{gi}
465: P.~Geiger and N.~Isgur,
466: %``Strange hadronic loops of the proton: A quark model calculation,''
467: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 299 (1997).
468: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9610445].
469: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9610445;%%
470:
471: %\cite{Geiger:1993va}
472: \bibitem{gi2}
473: P.~Geiger and N.~Isgur,
474: %``When can hadronic loops scuttle the OZI rule?,''
475: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 47}, 5050 (1993).
476: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D47,5050;%%
477:
478: \bibitem{pz}
479: N.~A.~Tornqvist and P.~$\dot {\rm Z}$enczykowski,
480: %``Ground State Baryon Mass Splittings From Unitarity,''
481: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 29}, 2139 (1984).
482: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D29,2139;%%
483:
484: \bibitem{3p0}
485: L. Micu, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B10}, 521 (1969); R. Carlitz
486: and M. Kislinger, Phys. Rev. D {\bf2}, 336 (1970);
487: A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, O. Pene, and J.-C.
488: Raynal, Phys. Rev. D {\bf8}, 2233 (1973); Phys. Lett. {\bf 71 B}, 397
489: (1977); {\it ibid} {\bf 72 B}, 57 (1977).
490:
491: \bibitem{3p02}
492: R. Kokoski and N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D {\bf35}, 907
493: (1987); S. Capstick and W. Roberts,
494: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 47}, 1994; A. LeYaouanc {\it et al.}, {\sl Hadron Transitions in the Quark Model}, (Gordon Breach, New York, 1988);
495: S.~Godfrey and N.~Isgur, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 32}, 189 (1985);
496: R.~Bonnaz and B.~Silvestre-Brac,
497: Prog.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 44}, 369 (2000).
498:
499: \bibitem{3s1}
500: J.W. Alcock, M.J. Burfitt, W.N. Cottingham, Z. Phys.
501: {\bf C25}, 161 (1984);
502: P.~Geiger and E.~S.~Swanson, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50}, 6855 (1994).
503:
504: %\cite{Ackleh:1996yt}
505: \bibitem{Ackleh:1996yt}
506: E.~S.~Ackleh, T.~Barnes and E.~S.~Swanson,
507: %``On the Mechanism of Open-Flavor Strong Decays,''
508: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54}, 6811 (1996).
509: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9604355].
510: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9604355;%%
511:
512: \bibitem{SDdecay}
513: J.~C.~Bloch, Y.~L.~Kalinovsky, C.~D.~Roberts and S.~M.~Schmidt,
514: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60}, 111502 (1999);
515: M.~A.~Pichowsky, S.~Walawalkar and S.~Capstick, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60}, 054030 (1999);
516: R.~Ricken, M.~Koll, D.~Merten, B.~C.~Metsch and H.~R.~Petry, Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ A {\bf 9}, 221 (2000).
517:
518: \bibitem{chiral}
519: S.~L.~Adler and A.~C.~Davis, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 244}, 469 (1984);
520: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B244,469;%%
521: J.~R.~Finger and J.~E.~Mandula,
522: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 199}, 168 (1982);
523: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B199,168;%%
524: A.~Le Yaouanc, L.~Oliver, S.~Ono, O.~Pene and J.~C.~Raynal,
525: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 31}, 137 (1985).
526: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D31,137;%%
527:
528:
529: \bibitem{ss6}
530: A.~P.~Szczepaniak and E.~S.~Swanson,
531: %``Chiral extrapolation, renormalization, and the viability of the quark model,''
532: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 87}, 072001 (2001).
533: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0006306].
534: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0006306;%%
535:
536: \bibitem{lc}
537: S.~Capstick and B.~D.~Keister,
538: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 51}, 3598 (1995);
539: L.~S.~Kisslinger, H.~M.~Choi and C.~R.~Ji, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}, 113005 (2001).
540: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0101053;%%
541: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 9411016;%%
542:
543: \bibitem{SD}
544: P.~Maris and C.~D.~Roberts, Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 56}, 3369 (1997);
545: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 9708029;%%
546: U.~Loring, B.~C.~Metsch and H.~R.~Petry, Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ A {\bf 10}, 395 (2001).
547: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0103289;%%
548:
549: \bibitem{oge1}
550: A.~De Rujula, H.~Georgi and S.~L.~Glashow,
551: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 12}, 147 (1975);
552: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D12,147;%%
553:
554: \bibitem{oge2}
555: N.~Isgur and G.~Karl, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 18}, 4187 (1978).
556: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D18,4187;%%
557:
558:
559: \bibitem{DR} D. Robson, {\it Proceedings of the Topical Conference on
560: Nuclear Chromodynamics}, Argonne National Laboratory (1988), Eds.
561: J. Qiu and D. Sivers (World Scientific), pg. 174.
562:
563:
564: \bibitem{GR}
565: L.~Y.~Glozman and D.~O.~Riska,
566: %``The Spectrum of the nucleons and the strange hyperons and chiral dynamics,''
567: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 268}, 263 (1996).
568: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9505422;%%
569:
570: %\cite{Isgur:2000jv}
571: \bibitem{Isgur:2000jv}
572: N.~Isgur,
573: %``Critique of a pion exchange model for interquark forces,''
574: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}, 054026 (2000).
575: %[arXiv:nucl-th/9908028].
576: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 9908028;%%
577:
578: \bibitem{inst}
579: G. 't Hooft, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 37}, 8 (1976); A.M. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. {\bf 59B}, 82
580: (1975); Nucl. Phys. {\bf B121}, 429 (1977); A.A. Belavin, A.M. Polyakov, A. Schwartz, and
581: Y. Tyupkin, Phys. Lett. {\bf 59B}, 85 (1975); R. Jackiw and C. Rebbi, Phys. Rev. Lett.
582: {\bf 37}, 172 (1976).
583:
584: \bibitem{SS}
585: See T. Sch\"afer and E. Shuryak, Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 70}, 323 (1998).
586:
587: \bibitem{W}
588: E.~Witten,
589: %``Instantons, The Quark Model, And The 1/N Expansion,''
590: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 149}, 285 (1979); see also
591: %CITATION = NUPHA,B149,285;%%
592: J.~Kogut and L.~Susskind,
593: %``How Quark Confinement solves the eta -> 3 pi problem ''
594: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 11}, 3594 (1975).
595: %CITATION = PHRVA,D11,3594;%%
596:
597:
598: \bibitem{Horvath:2001ir}
599: I.~Horvath, N.~Isgur, J.~McCune and H.~B.~Thacker,
600: %``Evidence against instanton dominance of topological charge fluctuations in QCD,''
601: hep-lat/0102003.
602: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0102003;%%
603:
604:
605: \bibitem{cc}
606: R.~G.~Edwards and U.~M.~Heller,
607: %``Are topological charge fluctuations in QCD instanton dominated?,''
608: hep-lat/0105004;
609: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0105004;%%
610: T.~DeGrand and A.~Hasenfratz,
611: %``Comment on 'Evidence against instanton dominance of topological charge fluctuations in QCD',''
612: hep-lat/0103002.
613: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0103002;%%
614:
615: \bibitem{lib} D.A. Liberman, Phys. Rev. {\bf D16}, 1542 (1977).
616:
617: \bibitem{rg}
618: M. Oka and K. Yazaki, Phys. Lett. {\bf 90B} (1980), 41;
619: Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf 66} (1981), 556; {\it ibid.}, p.572;
620: A. Faessler, F. Fernandez, G. Lubeck and K. Shimizu, Phys. Lett. {\bf 112B}, Y. Suzuki and
621: K.T. Hecht, Phys. Rev. {\bf C27}. 299 (1983).
622: (1982), 201;
623:
624:
625: \bibitem{BS}
626: T.~Barnes and E.~S.~Swanson,
627: %``A Diagrammatic approach to meson-meson scattering in the nonrelativistic quark potential model,''
628: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 46}, 131 (1992);
629: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D46,131;%%
630: E.~S.~Swanson,
631: %``Intermeson potentials from the constituent quark model,''
632: Annals Phys.\ {\bf 220}, 73 (1992).
633: %%CITATION = APNYA,220,73;%%
634:
635:
636: \bibitem{LC}
637: S.~J.~Brodsky,
638: ``Hadronic light-front wavefunctions and QCD phenomenology,''
639: hep-ph/0102051.
640: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0102051;%%
641:
642: \bibitem{Bhanot:1979vb}
643: G.~Bhanot and M.~E.~Peskin,
644: %``Short Distance Analysis For Heavy Quark Systems. 2. Applications,''
645: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 156}, 391 (1979).
646: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B156,391;%%
647:
648: \bibitem{p2}
649: M. Peksin, private communication.
650:
651:
652: \bibitem{SL}
653: T.~S.~Lee and T.~Sato,
654: %``Dynamical study of Delta excitation with N(e,e' pi) reaction,''
655: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 684}, 327 (2001).
656: %%CITATION = NUPHA,A684,327;%%
657:
658: \bibitem{Capstick}
659: S.~Capstick {\it et al.},
660: ``Key issues in hadronic physics,''
661: hep-ph/0012238.
662: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0012238;%%
663:
664: \end{references}
665:
666: \end{document}
667: