1: \documentstyle[12pt,epsfig]{article}

2: %%\hoffset=-1.5cm

3: %\voffset=2.cm

4: 

5: \oddsidemargin=-8mm

6: \topmargin=-90pt

7:   \textwidth=180mm

8: \columnsep=4mm

9:   \textheight=61pc

10: \tolerance=1000

11: 

12: \input epsf

13: 

14: \newcommand{\frat}[2]{\frac{\textstyle #1}{\textstyle #2}}

15: \newcommand{\dmn}[2]{\mbox{$#1\!\cdot\! 10^{#2}\,$}}

16: \newcommand{\xmn}[2]{\mbox{$#1\!\times\! 10^{#2}\,$}}

17: \newcommand{\vf}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath $#1$}}

18: \newcommand{\nomer}[1]{\mbox{$\cal N$\hspace{-.5ex}\raisebox{.3ex}

19:            {\underline{\tiny 0}$\!$} #1}}

20: \newcommand{\grpicture}[1]

21: {\epsfxsize=200pt 

22: \hspace{10mm} \parbox{200pt}{\epsfbox{#1.ps}} \vspace{10mm}

23: }

24: 

25: \begin{document}

26: \begin{center}

27: {\Large 

28: \bf Instanton liquid at finite quark density}\\

29: \vspace{0.5cm}

30: S. V. Molodtsov, G. M. Zinovjev$^\dagger$ 

31: \\

32: \vspace{0.5cm}

33:  {\small\it State Research Center,

34: Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics,

35: 117259, Moscow, RUSSIA}\\ 

36: $^\dagger$

37: {\small \it

38: Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics,\\

39: National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 

40: UA-03143, Kiev, UKRAINE}

41: \end{center}

42: \vspace{0.5cm}

43: \begin{abstract}

44: The interaction of light quarks and instanton liquid in the phase

45: of nonzero values of chiral condensate is studied at finite

46: quark/baryon density. Calculating the generating functional in the

47: tadpole approximation we investigate the behaviour of dynamical quark mass 

48: and chiral condensate together with instanton liquid density (which shows 

49: insignificant increase) as a function of quark/baryon chemical

50: potential. We argue on the noticeable increase of quark density

51: at the point of developing the nonzero magnitude of diquark condensate

52: due only to the quark interaction with the instanton liquid.

53: \end{abstract}

54: \vspace{0.5cm}

55: 

56: PACS: 11.15 Kc, 12.38-Aw

57: \\

58: \\

59: %\newpage

60: %\baselineskip 0.9cm

61: %\noindent

62: 

63: \vspace{0.5cm}

64: \noindent

65: Since the discovery of instanton solutions in the Yang-Mills theory the 

66: functional integral language has become very popular and the most operational

67: instrument of quantum chromodynamics (QCD) phenomenology.

68: This formulation tolerates the nonperturbative identification of the field

69: configurations dominating the action and manifests the fundamental physics

70: features of QCD distinguishing it from other complex systems

71: with many degrees of freedom. In an overwhelming number of these theories

72: the quanta exchanged between interacting fermions according the initial

73: Lagrangian lead to the formulation of the concept of interaction potential and 

74: the definition of its concrete form. The dominating role of topological 

75: excitations of the gluon field and quantum oscillations about them in the QCD 

76: physics allowed us to understand and successfully explain new physical effects 

77: related, first of all, to the process of chiral symmetry breaking. Moreover, 

78: it compels us to have some doubts on the potential concept (perturbative 

79: description) pertinent.

80: 

81: In the intervening years considerable theoretical efforts were devoted

82: to extend the analytical description beyond dilute instanton gas approach

83: \cite{cdg}. It was shown that an effective instanton-anti-instanton 

84: interaction could stabilize the medium of these pseudoparticles (PP) \cite{2}

85: at the level of pretty reasonable values of major parameters

86: (average sizes and distances between PPs) forming rather instanton 

87: liquid \cite{sh}. The approach developed has succeeded in making interesting

88: (even quantitative) predictions although the lattice QCD studies only managed 

89: to put the problem of investigating the instanton role on the serious 

90: theoretical ground \cite{neg}. While much has been learned about the QCD

91: phase structure at finite temperature, this structure at nonzero 

92: quark/baryon densities has been significantly less explored because of

93: very serious technical difficulties, mainly, with putting the fermions (and

94: respective chemical potential) on the lattice. Nowadays, the possibility of

95: direct experimental measurements of instanton-induced effects is even discussed

96: in view of the future program for deep-inelastic scattering (small size 

97: instantons) at HERA \cite{rs}) and for ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions 

98: at RHIC and LHC \cite{col}.  

99: 

100: This paper is addressed to investigate the light quark interactions with the 

101: instanton liquid (IL) in the phase of nonzero chiral condensate values at 

102: finite quark/baryon densities and continue the analysis we began in our 

103: preceding paper \cite{we0} where a new method was developed to estimate the 

104: IL back-reaction on the quark presence. Before it was always considered to be 

105: negligible. It is natural to start with the generating functional of the IL 

106: theory having the factorized form \cite{2} 

107: $$

108: {\cal Z}~=~{\cal Z}_g~\cdot~{\cal Z}_\psi~,

109: $$

110: where the factor ${\cal Z}_g$ originates information on the gluon condensate

111: while the fermion component ${\cal Z}_\psi$ provides the opportunity to study

112: the quark behaviour in the instanton medium and, in particular, the chiral and

113: diquark condensates together with their excitations \cite{2}. The factor 

114: ${\cal Z}_g$ is treated in quasi-classical approximation supposing the

115: superposition of pseudo-particle (PP) fields $A_{\bar I I}(x;\gamma)$ which

116: are the Euclidean solutions of the Yang-Mills equations called the 

117: (anti-)instantons (${\bar I I}$) to be dominant saturating configurations. 

118: Such a solution is characterized by the parameters $\gamma={\rho,z,U}$ where  

119: $\rho$ denotes the PP size centered at the coordinate $z$ with the colour

120: orientation defined by the matrix $U$ in the space of colour group $SU(N_c)$. 

121: Let us suppose, for clarity, $N$ pseudo-particles available in four-volume $V$

122: and a liquid is topologically neutral $N_{\bar I}=N_I=N/2$. Formulating the 

123: variational maximum principle the 

124: following practical estimate has been obtained

125: $${\cal Z}_g~\simeq~e^{-\langle S\rangle}~,$$ 

126: with the average IL action $\langle S\rangle$ defined by the additive 

127: functional

128: \begin{equation}

129: \label{s}

130: \langle S\rangle=\int d z \int d\rho~n(\rho)~s(\rho)~,

131: \end{equation}

132: and with averaging the action per one instanton

133: \begin{equation}

134: \label{si}

135: s(\rho)=\beta(\rho)+5 \ln(\Lambda\rho)-\ln \widetilde \beta^{2N_c}

136: +\beta \xi^2\rho^2\int d\rho_1~n(\rho_1)\rho_1^{2}~,

137: \end{equation}

138: weighted with instanton size distribution function

139: \begin{equation}

140: \label{nrho}

141: n(\rho)=C~e^{-s(\rho)}=C~\rho^{-5} \widetilde\beta^{2 N_c} 

142: e^{-\beta(\rho)-\nu \rho^2/\overline{\rho^2}}~,

143: \end{equation}

144: where $\overline{\rho^2}=\int d\rho~\rho^2~n(\rho)/n=

145: \left(\frat{\nu}{\beta \xi^2 n}\right)^{1/2},~n=\int d\rho~n(\rho)=

146: \frat{N}{V}$,

147: $\nu=\frat{b-4}{2}$, $b=\frat{11~N_c-2~N_f}{3}$ and 

148: $N_f$ is the number of flavours.

149: The constant $C$ is defined by the variational principle in the selfconsistent 

150: way and

151: $\beta(\rho)=\frat{8\pi^2}{g^2}=-\ln C_{N_c}-b \ln(\Lambda \rho)$

152: ($\Lambda=\Lambda_{\overline{MS}}=0.92 \Lambda_{P.V.}$) 

153: with another constant $C_{N_c}$ depending on the renormalization scheme,

154: in particular, here

155: $C_{N_c}\approx\frat{4.66~\exp(-1.68 N_c)}

156: {\pi^2 (N_c-1)!(N_c-2)!}$. The parameters $\beta=\beta(\bar\rho)$ and 

157: $\widetilde \beta=\beta+\ln C_{N_c}$ are fixed at the characteristic scale of 

158: the average PP size $\bar\rho$ . The constant 

159: $\xi^2=\frat{27}{4}\frat{N_c}{N_c^{2}-1} \pi^2$ 

160: gives information on interaction in the stochastic ensemble of PPs. Then 

161: the IL parameters extracted, for example, average PP size $\bar\rho$ and the IL

162: density $n$ agree reasonably with their values obtained from the 

163: phenomenological studies of the QCD vacuum.

164: 

165: In the quark determinant ${\cal Z}_\psi$ the quark fields are considered being 

166: {\it influenced} by  stochastic PP ensemble but the quark  

167: {\it backreaction} upon the instanton medium is usually ignored, i.e.

168: $${\cal Z}_\psi~\simeq~\int D\psi^\dagger D\psi~\langle\langle~

169: e^{S(\psi,\psi^\dagger,A)}~\rangle\rangle_A~.$$

170: Small values of the packing fraction parameter  

171: ($n\bar\rho^4$) allow us to neglect the correlations between PPs and one

172: usually deals with the limit $N_c\to\infty$. The dominant contribution

173: to the action of fermion fields mainly comes from the zero modes 

174: $\Phi(x-z;\mu)$ which are the solutions of the Dirac equation 

175: $$[i\hat D(A_{\bar I I})-i\mu \gamma_4]~\Phi_{\bar I I}=0~,$$ 

176: with the chemical potential $\mu$ in the (anti-)instanton field

177: $A_{\bar I I}$, and their Weyl components 

178: \begin{center}

179: \vspace{0.25cm}

180: \parbox[b]{3.in}{$%{3.6in}

181: \Phi(x;\mu)=

182:  \left %\|

183:  |\begin{array}{r}

184: \Phi_{\bar I}(x;\mu)\\

185: \Phi_{I}(x;\mu)

186: \end{array} \right %\|

187: |~,$}

188: \vspace{0.25cm}

189: \end{center}

190: 

191: \noindent

192: look like \cite{abr}

193: $$

194: \left[\Phi_{R,L}(x)\right]^{\alpha i}=\frat{\rho}{2\sqrt{2}\pi}~

195: e^{\mu x_4}\sqrt{\Pi(x)}~\partial_\mu

196: \left (\frat{e^{-\mu x_4} F(x;\mu)}{\Pi(x)}\right)

197: (\sigma^\pm)^i_{j}~\varepsilon^{jk}~U^\alpha_{k}~,

198: $$

199: with

200: $$\Pi(x)=1+\frat{\rho^2}{x_{4}^2+r^2}~,~~F(x;\mu)=\frat{1}{x_{4}^2+r^2}

201: \left[ \cos(\mu r)+\frat{x_4}{r}\sin(\mu r)\right]~.

202: $$

203: Here $\Phi_{R,L}=P_\pm~\Phi,~P_\pm=\frat{1\pm\gamma_5}{2}$, $r=|{\vf x}|$,

204: $\sigma^{\pm}_\mu=(\pm i{\vf \sigma},1),$  ${\vf \sigma}$ is the vector of

205: the Pauli matrices and $\varepsilon$ is the antisymmetric tensor. In 

206: particular, the quark determinant at $N_f=1$ might be written as \cite{2}

207: \begin{equation}

208: \label{6}

209: {\cal Z}_\psi~\simeq~\int D\psi^\dagger D\psi

210: ~\left(\frat{Y^+}{VR}\right)^{N_+}

211: \left(\frat{Y^-}{VR}\right)^{N_-} 

212: \exp\left\{\int d x~\psi^\dagger(x)~(i\hat\partial-i\mu\gamma_4)

213: \psi(x)\right\}~,

214: \end{equation}

215: where the factor $R$ provides the dimensionless result. The preexponential

216: factors are responsible just for the instanton-induced interaction of quarks 

217: \cite{tH}

218: $$Y^{\pm}=i\int dz~dU~d\rho~n(\rho)/n

219: \int dxdy~\psi_{L,R}^\dagger(x)~(i\partial-i\mu)^{\mp}

220: \Phi_{\bar I I}(x-z)~

221: \widetilde\Phi_{\bar I I}(y-z)~(i\partial-i\mu)^{\pm}~\psi_{L,R}(y)~, 

222: $$

223: and the colour orientation averaging is performed by integrating over $dU$.

224: The designation $\widetilde \Phi$ is introduced for the conjugated zero mode

225: $\widetilde \Phi_{I}(x;\mu)=\Phi_{I}^\dagger(x;-\mu)$.

226: $\mu^\pm$ and similar designations are used for the four-vectors spanned on

227: the matrices $\sigma^\pm_{\nu}$, i.e. 

228: $\mu^\pm=\mu^\nu\sigma^\pm_{\nu}$, $\mu_\nu=({\vf 0},\mu)$.

229: 

230: Integrating over the auxiliary parameter $\lambda$ brings the quark 

231: determinant $Z_\psi$ to the exponential form convenient for the saddle 

232: point calculation 

233: \begin{eqnarray}

234: \label{9}

235: &&{\cal Z}_\psi\simeq\int \frat{d\lambda}{2\pi}~

236: \exp\left\{N\ln\left(\frat{N}{i\lambda VR}\right)-N\right\}

237: \times\nonumber\\

238: &&\times

239: \int D\psi^\dagger D\psi~\exp

240: \left\{\int \frat{dk}{(2\pi)^4}

241: \psi^\dagger(k)\left(-\hat k-i\hat\mu+

242: \frat{i\lambda}{N_c} \gamma_0(k;\mu)\right)\psi(k)\right\}~.\nonumber

243: \end{eqnarray}

244: The complex function $\gamma_0(k;\mu)$ of this part of the generating

245: functional is defined by the Fourier components of the zero modes 

246: $$\gamma_0(k;\mu)=(k+i\mu)_\alpha(k+i\mu)_\alpha~ h_\beta(k;\mu)

247: h_\beta(k;\mu)~,~~~

248: \Phi(k;\mu)^{i\alpha}=h_\mu(k;\mu)

249: (\sigma_\mu^{\pm})^i_{j}~\varepsilon^{jk}~U^\alpha_{k}~,

250: $$

251: \begin{eqnarray}

252: h_4(k_4,k;\mu)&=&\frat{\pi\rho^3}{4 k}

253: \{(k-\mu-ik_4)[(2k_4+i\mu)f^{-}_{1}+i(k-\mu-ik_4)f^{-}_2]+\nonumber\\

254: &+&(k+\mu+ik_4)[(2k_4+i\mu)f^{+}_{1}-i(k+\mu+ik_4)f^{+}_2]\}~,\nonumber

255: \end{eqnarray}

256: \begin{eqnarray}

257: h_i(k_4,k;\mu)&=&\frat{\pi\rho^3k_i}{4 k^2}

258: \left\{(2k-\mu)(k-\mu-ik_4)f^{-}_{1}+(2k+\mu)(k+\mu+ik_4)f^{+}_1+

259: \right.\nonumber\\

260: &+&\left[2(k-\mu)(k-\mu-ik_4)-\frat{1}{k}(\mu+ik_4)[k_4^{2}+(p-\mu)^2]

261: \right]f^{-}_{2}+\nonumber\\

262: &+&\left.

263: \left[2(k+\mu)(k+\mu+ik_4)+\frat{1}{k}(\mu+ik_4)[k_4^{2}+(p+\mu)^2]

264: \right]f^{+}_{2}\right\}~,\nonumber

265: \end{eqnarray}

266: where $k=|{\vf k}|$ for the spatial components of four-vector,

267: $$f_1^{\pm}=

268: \frat{I_1(z^\pm)K_0(z^\pm)-I_0(z^\pm)K_1(z^\pm)}

269: {z^\pm}~,

270: $$

271: $$f_2^{\pm}=\frat{I_1(z^\pm)K_1(z^\pm)}{z^2_{\pm}}~,

272: ~~z^\pm=\frat{\rho}{2}\sqrt{k_4^{2}+(k\pm\mu)^2}~,$$

273: and $I_i,~K_i~(i=0,1)$ are the modified Bessel functions.

274: 

275: In order not to overload the following formulae with the unnecessary 

276: coefficients we introduce the dimensionless variables

277: $$

278: \frat{k_4\bar\rho}{2}\to k_4~,~~

279: \frat{k\bar\rho}{2}\to k~,~~\frat{\lambda\bar\rho^3}{2N_c}\to \lambda,

280: ~~\psi(k)\to \bar\rho^{5/2}~\psi(k)~.

281: $$

282: Then it is easy to get the saddle point equation taking the 

283: form 

284: \begin{equation}

285: \label{per}

286: \frat{n\bar\rho^4}{\lambda}-2N_c\int\frat{dk}{\pi^4}

287: \frat{[\lambda^2 \gamma_{0}^2(k;\mu)]^{'}_\lambda}

288: {(k+i\mu)^2+\lambda^2 \gamma_{0}^2(k;\mu)}=0~,

289: \end{equation}

290: here the prime is attributed to differentiating in $\lambda$.

291: 

292: It has been shown in Refs. \cite{we0}, \cite{we} that the backreaction of 

293: quarks upon IL may be reproduced perturbatively with the small variations of 

294: the IL parameters $\delta n$ and $\delta \rho$ around their equilibrium values 

295: $n$ and $\bar\rho$. These variations are actually accommodated by the approach 

296: if the deformable (crumpled) (anti-)instantons of size $\rho$ being the 

297: function of $x$ and $z$, i.e. $\rho\to\rho(x,z)$ are utilized as the saturating

298: configurations. If the wave length of excitations is much larger than the

299: characteristic (anti-)instanton size $\bar\rho$ (for example, for $\pi$-meson)

300: the mean action per one instanton gains the extra term (looking like 

301: kinetic energy) generated by the deformable (anti-)instantons  

302: \begin{equation}

303: \label{estim}

304: \langle S\rangle\simeq\int d z \int d\rho~n(\rho)

305: ~\left\{~\frat{\kappa}{2}~\left(\frat{\partial \rho}{\partial z}\right)^2

306: +s(\rho)\right\}~,

307: \end{equation}

308: where $\kappa$ is the kinetic coefficient being derived within the 

309: quasi-classical approach. If we strive for holding the precision declared in this

310: paper the kinetic coefficient should be fixed on a characteristic scale, 

311: for example, as $\kappa\sim\kappa(\bar\rho)$. Our estimates give the 

312: value of a few single instanton actions $\kappa\sim c~\beta$ 

313: (with the factor $c\sim 1.5$ --- $6$ depending on the  ansatz for the 

314: saturating configurations). Collecting the terms of the second order in 

315: deviation from the point of action minimum only  

316: $\left.\frat{d s(\rho)}{d\rho}\right|_{\rho_c}=0$, 

317: and taking approximately

318: \begin{equation}

319: \label{dec}

320: s(\rho)\simeq s(\bar\rho)+\frat{s^{(2)}(\bar\rho)}{2}~\varphi^2,~

321: \end{equation} 

322: where $s^{(2)}(\bar\rho)\simeq\left.\frat{d^2 s(\rho)}{d\rho^2}

323: \right|_{\rho_c}=\frat{4\nu}{\overline{\rho^2}},$ and the scalar field

324: $\varphi=\delta\rho=\rho-\rho_c\simeq\rho-\bar\rho$ is the field of deviations

325: from the equilibrium value of 

326: $\rho_c=\bar\rho~\left(1-\frat{1}{2\nu}\right)^{1/2}\simeq\bar\rho$,

327: it becomes clear the deformation field is described by the following Lagrangian

328: density

329: {\footnote{)

330: It seems to us the physical meaning of the deformation field is analogous to

331: the phonons of solid state physics. It is why we called them phononlike  

332: excitations of IL \cite{we}.}}): 

333: $${\cal L}=\frat{n\kappa}{2}

334: \left\{~\left(\frat{\partial \varphi}{\partial z}\right)^2+

335: M^2\varphi^2\right\}~,$$

336: with the mass gap of phononlike excitations  

337: $M^2=\frat{s^{(2)}(\bar\rho)}{\kappa}=

338: \frat{4\nu}{\kappa \overline{\rho^2}}$.

339: $M\approx 1.21~\Lambda$ 

340: for IL in the "quenched" approximation with the parameters fixed as $N_c=3$,

341: $~c=4$, $~\bar\rho~\Lambda\approx 0.37,~\beta\approx 17.5,~n~\Lambda^{-4}

342: \approx 0.44$  \cite{we}. 

343:  

344: Including the variations of zero modes in the quark determinant results in

345: changing those for

346: $\Phi_{\bar I I}(x-z,\rho)\simeq\Phi_{\bar I I}(x-z,\rho_c)+

347: \Phi_{{\bar I I}}^{(1)}(x-z,\rho_c)\delta\rho(x,z)$,

348: where $\Phi^{(1)}_{\bar I I}(u,\rho_c)=\partial\Phi_{\bar I I}(u,\rho)/\partial

349: \rho|_{\rho=\rho_c}$ and because of the adiabaticity constraint it is valid 

350: $\delta\rho(x,z)\simeq\delta\rho(z,z)=\varphi(z)$. The extra contributions

351: of scalar field generate the corrections in the kernels of factors $Y^{\pm}$ 

352: which are treated in the linear approximation in $\varphi$ and it is 

353: supposed $\rho_c\simeq\bar\rho$ everywhere. As result we have the 

354: effective Lagrangian with the Yukawa interaction of quarks and colourless

355: scalar field 

356: \begin{eqnarray}

357: \label{10}

358: &&{\cal Z}\simeq\int d\lambda~\widetilde{\cal Z}_g\int D\psi^\dagger D\psi~ 

359: D\varphi~\exp\left\{

360: N~\left(\ln\frat{n\bar\rho^4}{\lambda}-1\right)-\int 

361: \frat{dk}{\pi^4}~\frat{1}{2}~\varphi(-k)~

362: 4~[k^2+M^2]~\varphi(k)\right\}\times\nonumber\\

363: [-.2cm]

364: \\[-.25cm]

365: &&\times\exp\left\{\int \frat{dkdl}{\pi^8}~\psi^\dagger(k)

366: ~2~\left[\pi^4\delta(k-l)(-\hat k-i\hat\mu+i\lambda \gamma_0(k;\mu))+

367: i\lambda

368: \gamma_1(k,l;\mu)~\varphi(k-l)\right]~\psi(l)\right\}~.\nonumber

369: \end{eqnarray}

370: Let us mention the dimensionless variables as the scalar field

371: $\varphi(k)\to (n\kappa)^{-1/2}\bar\rho^3~\varphi(k)$ and its mass 

372: $\frat{M\bar\rho}{2}\to M$ were introduced here. $\widetilde{\cal Z}_g = 

373: e^{\langle S(s(\bar\rho))\rangle}$ denotes the part of the gluon component 

374: of the generating

375: functional which survives expanding the action per one instanton in small

376: deviation from the instanton equilibrium size. The general form of the kernel

377: $\gamma_1(k,l;\mu)$ is not of crucial importance for us here. We may simplify

378: calculation essentially because of the presence of quark condensate and

379: collect the leading contributions to the functional Eq. (\ref{10}) which are 

380: just the tadpole graphs. In this particular case the following purturbative

381: scheme (in the deviation from the condensate magnitude) is applicable

382: \begin{equation}

383: \label{scheme}

384: \psi^\dagger\psi~\varphi=\langle\psi^\dagger\psi\rangle~\varphi+

385: \{\psi^\dagger\psi-\langle\psi^\dagger\psi\rangle\}~\varphi~,

386: \end{equation}

387: and for the vertex we then have   

388: $$\gamma_1(k;\mu)=\frat{2}{(n\bar\rho^4\kappa)^{1/2}}\{

389: [k h+(k_4+i\mu)h_4][k\delta h+(k_4+i\mu)\delta h_4]+ 

390: [(k_4+i\mu) h-kh_4][(k_4+i\mu)\delta h-k\delta h_4]\}.

391: $$ 

392: Here we introduced the component $h$ spanned on the unit vector $\frat{k_i}{k}$

393: $h_i=\frat{k_i}{k}~h$ and $\delta h$ and $\delta h_4$ are produced by  

394: $h$ and $h_4$ while the substitutions $f^\pm_{i}\to g^\pm_{i}$ where 

395: $$g_1^{\pm}=f_1^{\pm}+

396: 2(I_0^{\pm}K_0^{\pm}-I_1^{\pm}K_1^{\pm})~,~~  

397: g_2^{\pm}=-f_1^{\pm}-f_2^{\pm}~,

398: $$

399: done.

400: 

401: In the present paper two corrections are taken into account. One of them is

402: related to the changes of dynamical quark mass and chiral condensate due to

403: the interaction with the scalar field but another one comes from changing

404: the IL density invoked by the shift of the PP equilibrium size. The former

405: is given by the following contribution

406: \begin{eqnarray}

407: \label{12}

408: &&2~(i\lambda)^2

409: \int \frat{dkdl~dk'dl'}{\pi^{16}}~\gamma_1(k,l;\mu)~\gamma_1(k',l';\mu)

410: ~~\psi^\dagger(k)\psi(l)~~\psi^\dagger(k')\psi(l')~

411: ~\langle\varphi(k-l)~\varphi(k'-l')\rangle\simeq\nonumber\\

412: [-.2cm]

413: \\[-.25cm]

414: &&\simeq 4~\lambda^2

415: \int \frat{dk}{\pi^4}~\gamma_1(k;\mu)~\psi^\dagger(k)\psi(k)

416: ~\int \frat{dl}{\pi^4}~\gamma_1(l;\mu)~{\mbox{ Tr}}~S(l)~D(0)~,\nonumber 

417: \end{eqnarray}

418: where the conventional definitions are introduced for the convolution of scalar

419: field

420: $$\langle\varphi(k)~\varphi(l)\rangle=

421: \pi^4\delta(k+l)~D(k)~,~~D(k)=\frat{1}{4~(k^2+M^2)}~,$$

422: and for the quark Green function $S(k)$

423: $$\langle\psi^\dagger (k)\psi(l)\rangle=

424: -\pi^4 \delta(k-l){\mbox{ Tr}}~S(k)~.$$ 

425: All the factors surrounding $\psi^\dagger(k)\psi(k)$ in Eq. (\ref{12}) 

426: give the extra contribution to the quark dynamical mass 

427: $\lambda\gamma_0(k;\mu)\to \lambda\Gamma(k;\mu)=

428: \lambda\gamma_0(k;\mu)+\lambda\delta \gamma_0(k;\mu)$,

429: where

430: \begin{equation}

431: \label{kirmas}

432: \delta \gamma_0(k;\mu)=\gamma_1(k;\mu)~(-2i\lambda)

433: ~\int \frat{dl}{\pi^4}~\gamma_1(l;\mu)~{\mbox{ Tr}}~S(l)~D(0)~.

434: \end{equation}  

435: Let us introduce now the auxiliary function $c(\lambda)$ in order to 

436: emphasize the obvious parameter dependence of $\delta\gamma$, i.e. 

437: $$\delta \gamma_0(k;\mu)=\frat{N_c}{(n\bar\rho^4\kappa)^{1/2}}

438: ~\frat{\kappa}{\nu}~\lambda^2 c(\lambda)~\gamma_1(k;\mu)~.$$

439: If the guark Green function is known $c(\lambda)$ could be defined by the

440: complete integral equation

441: \begin{equation}

442: \label{cl}

443: c(\lambda)=( n\bar\rho^4\kappa)^{1/2}~\int \frat{dk}{\pi^4}

444: ~\gamma_1(k;\mu)~\frat{\Gamma(k;\mu)}{(k+i\mu)^2+\lambda^2 \Gamma^2(k;\mu)}~,

445: \end{equation}

446: what helps also to calculate $S(k)$.

447: 

448: 

449: It was shown in Ref. \cite{we0} the variation of equilibrium PP size

450: generates the IL density variation and can be given by the tadpole 

451: contribution $\varphi(0)~\Delta$ with

452: $\Delta=\frat{4 N_c}{n\bar\rho^4}~\lambda^2 ~c(\lambda)$

453: which produces an extra term in the mean action per one instanton

454: $$

455: \langle S\rangle=

456: \int d z~n \left\{\langle s\rangle-

457: \langle \Delta~\frat{\rho-\rho_c}{\bar\rho}\rangle\right\}~.

458: $$

459: The maximum variational principle helps to find the PP average size 

460: $\bar\rho\Lambda=\exp\left\{-\frat{2N_c}{2\nu-1}\right\}$

461: and to obtain the following equation to calculate the IL density \cite{we0}

462: \begin{equation}

463: \label{a7}

464: (n\bar\rho^4)^2-\frat{\nu}{\beta\xi^2}~n\rho^4=

465: \frat{\Delta}{\beta \xi^2}~

466: \frat{\Gamma(\nu+1/2)}{2\sqrt{\nu}~\Gamma(\nu)}~.

467: \end{equation}

468: Eventually, we come to the equation for the saddle point of generating 

469: functional Eq. (\ref{10}) in the form

470: \begin{equation}

471: \label{perper}

472: \frat{n\bar\rho^4}{\lambda}-

473: 2N_c\int\frat{dk}{\pi^4}~\frat{2\lambda \Gamma^2(k;\mu)+\lambda^2 

474: \Gamma(k;\mu) \Gamma'(k;\mu)}

475: {(k+i\mu)^2+\lambda^2 \Gamma^2(k;\mu)}-(n\bar\rho^4)'~

476: \ln\frat{n\bar\rho^4}{\lambda}=0~,

477: \end{equation}

478: where the IL density variations are incorporated. The prime here signifies the 

479: derivative in  $\lambda$. But we need to know another derivative $c'$ to have 

480: the complete equation. With the definition of $c(\lambda)$ as given by 

481: Eq. (\ref{cl}), we obtain

482: $$(1-\lambda^2 A(\lambda))~

483: c'(\lambda)=2\lambda~A(\lambda)~c(\lambda)+B(\lambda)~$$

484: where the functions $A(\lambda)$ and $B(\lambda)$ are the following integrals

485: $$A(\lambda)=\alpha(\lambda)~\frat{N_c\kappa}{\nu}\int \frat{dk}{\pi^4}

486: \frat{\gamma^2_{1}(k;\mu)~[(k+i\mu)^2-\lambda^2 \Gamma^2(k;\mu)]^2}

487: {[(k+i\mu)^2+\lambda^2 \Gamma^2(k;\mu)]^4}~,

488: $$

489: $$B(\lambda)=-2\lambda~(n\bar\rho^4\kappa)^{1/2}~\int \frat{dk}{\pi^4}

490: \frat{\gamma_1(k)~\Gamma^3(k)}

491: {[(k+i\mu)^2+\lambda^2 \Gamma^2(k;\mu)]^2}~,

492: $$

493: and the factor $\alpha(\lambda)$ reads

494: $$\alpha(\lambda)=1-\lambda^2 \frat{N_c}{\beta\xi^2}

495: \frat{\Gamma(\nu+1/2)}{\nu^{1/2}\Gamma(\nu)}~

496: \frat{c(\lambda)}{n\bar\rho^4\left(n\bar\rho^4-

497: \frat{\nu}{2\beta\xi^2}\right)}~.

498: $$

499: 

500: The corresponding results for multiflavour approach $N_f>1$ could be obtained 

501: with the simple substitutions \cite{we0},\cite{dp2}. We have to introduce the

502: factor $N_f$ into the extra contribution to the dynamical mass in 

503: Eq. (\ref{12})

504: and to the factor $\Delta$ in the tadpole contribution. Besides, the logarithm 

505: in Eq. (\ref{perper}) should be modified according to the prescription 

506: $\ln\frat{n\bar\rho^4}{\lambda}\to 

507: \ln\left(\left(\frat{n\bar\rho^4}{2}\right)^{1/N_f}\frat{1}{\lambda}\right)$.

508: For clarity we take the factor $R$ to be equal one (see, for example, 

509: Eq. (\ref{6})) everywhere.  However, this parameter could be treated as the 

510: free one. Then the dimensional parameters of this approach are

511: given by the corresponding powers of $\Lambda_{QCD}$, for instance, 

512: $\rho\Lambda$ and could be selfconsistently obtained if the saddle point was 

513: already known.

514: 

515: \begin{figure}[htb]

516: %\grpicture{conmas32}

517: \centerline{\epsfig{file=conmas32.eps,width=8cm}}

518: \vspace*{-.1 cm}

519: \caption{The dynamical quark masses (solid lines) and chiral condensates 

520: (dashed lines) as the functions of chemical potential $\mu$ at $\Lambda=280~MeV$

521: at  $N_c=3$, $N_f=2$. Both lower curves correspond to the calculation

522: with the modified generating functional.}

523: \end{figure}

524: 

525: 

526: 

527:  

528: In Fig. 1 we expose the calculation results with the positive root of Eq.

529: (\ref{a7})

530: $$n\bar\rho^4=\frat{\nu}{2\beta\xi^2}+

531: \left[\left(\frat{\nu}{2\beta\xi^2}\right)^2+

532: \frat{\Delta}{\beta \xi^2}~

533: \frat{\Gamma(\nu+1/2)}{2\sqrt{\nu}~\Gamma(\nu)}

534: \right]^{1/2}~,$$

535: for the dynamical quark mass $\lambda \Gamma(0,\mu)$ (solid lines) and for

536: the chiral condensate $-i\langle\psi^\dagger\psi\rangle$ (dashed lines) as 

537: the functions of chemical potential $\mu$ at $\Lambda=280~MeV$ and for $N_c=3$

538: , $N_f=2$. Both lower curves correspond to the calculation with modified 

539: generating functional when the tadpole contributions are taken into account. 

540: Apparently, the results obtained are well within the scope of QCD vacuum

541: phenomenology and, in principle, the perfect fit is achievable with slight

542: variation of $\Lambda_{QCD}$. 

543: 

544: Fig. 2 demonstrates rather insignificant change of the IL density when the 

545: quarks are in the phase where the chiral condensate develops non-zero values 

546: though the quark influence on IL is transformed into the small strengthening 

547: of gluon condensate manifesting itself in the supplementary attraction 

548: available in the system of quarks and gluons. These features fully agree with 

549: the corresponding results of Ref. \cite{rapp} where the IL behaviour was 

550: studied in the so-called cocktail model (with (anti-)in\-stan\-ton molecula 

551: admixed). In that model the IL density in the phase of broken chiral symmetry 

552: is almost constant up to the critical values of chemical potential.

553: 

554: \begin{figure}[htb]

555: %\grpicture{dens32}

556: \centerline{\epsfig{file=dens32.eps,width=8cm}}

557: \vspace*{-.1 cm}

558: \caption{The IL density in the phase of nonzero chiral condensate values at

559: $N_c=3$, $N_f=2$ as function of chemical potential $\mu$.}

560: \end{figure}

561: 

562: The results of studying the saddle point parameter $\lambda$ (which is 

563: proportional to the free energy within the precision of one loop approximation)

564: at $N_c=3$, $N_f=2$ are shown in Fig. 3 where the upper curve was calculated  

565: without corrections coming from the quark feedback taken into account. In fact,

566: these results allow us to make one substantial qualitative prediction for 

567: the behaviour of critical chemical potential $\mu_c$ while transiting to the

568: colour superconductivity phase. Indeed, keeping in mind the results of Refs.

569: \cite{rapp}, \cite{diakcar} we should foresee the point $\mu_c$ shifting

570: perceptibly to the larger values because the parameter $\lambda$ for the

571: diquark phase at precritical values of $\mu$ is always disposed above than

572: for the corresponding curves of broken chiral symmetry phase. It means the  

573: crossing point with the lower curve is always situated further along the

574: $\mu$-axis than the crossing point with the upper curve. Such a situation

575: signals the density of quark matter in the critical interval could be 

576: comparable (or even larger) than normal nuclear density. In the meantime, we 

577: should remember that the IL model itself should obey some limitation for the 

578: chemical potential values. It is just the region where the transition to 

579: perturbative quark-gluon matter phase takes place. With quark matter density 

580: increasing the average interquark distance may be so small that the interquark 

581: gluon ('Coulomb') field strengths become comparable or even exceed the 

582: instanton ones. Then it is invalid to consider the (anti-)instanton ensemble 

583: as the saturating configuration and the IL approach is made irrelevant in this

584: region. 

585: 

586: \begin{figure}[htb]

587: %\grpicture{lam32}

588: \centerline{\epsfig{file=lam32.eps,width=8cm}}

589: \vspace*{-.1 cm}

590: \caption{Saddle point $\lambda$  as function of $\mu$

591: in the phase of broken chiral symmetry 

592: at $N_c=3$, $N_f=2$. The upper curve 

593: corresponds to the solution with no perturbation of  IL.}

594: \end{figure}

595:   

596: 

597: 

598: \noindent

599: The authors are supported by STCU\#015c,

600: CERN-INTAS 2000-349, NATO~2000-PST.CLG 977482 grants. They are also 

601: indebted to the Faberge Fund for providing us with the excellent conditions 

602: for the completion of this paper.

603: 

604: \newpage

605: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

606: %1

607: \bibitem{cdg}

608: C. G. Callan, R. Dashen, and D. J. Gross,

609: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 17}, 2717 (1978);\\

610: C. G. Callan, R. Dashen, and D. J. Gross,

611: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 66}, 375 (1977).

612: %2

613: \bibitem{2}

614: D. I. Diakonov and V. Yu. Petrov, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 245}, 259 (1984);\\

615: D. I. Diakonov and V. Yu. Petrov, {\it in Hadronic Matter under Extreme 

616: Conditions},\\ edited by V. Shelest and G. Zinovjev

617: (Naukova Dumka, Kiev, 1986) p. 192; \\

618: D. I. Diakonov, V. Yu. Petrov, and P. V. Pobylitsa,

619: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 226}, 471 (1989).

620: %3

621: \bibitem{sh}

622: E. V. Shuryak, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 203}, 93, 116, 140 (1982);

623: B {\bf 328}, 85, 102 (1989);\\

624: E.-M. Ilgenfritz and M. M\"uller-Preussker,

625: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 184}, 443 (1981);\\

626: T. Sch\"afer and E. V. Shuryak, Rev. Mod. Phys.

627: {\bf 70}, 323 (1998).

628: %4

629: \bibitem{neg}

630: J. W. Negele, hep-lat/9810053.

631: %5

632: \bibitem{rs}

633: F. Schrempp, hep-ph/0109032v1.

634: %6

635: \bibitem{col}

636: M. Alford, K. Rajagopal, and F. Wilczek, 

637: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 422}, (1998) 247;\\

638: R. Rapp, T. Sh\"afer, E. V. Shuryak and M. Velkovsky, 

639: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 81}, (1998) 53;\\

640: %7

641: \bibitem{we0}

642: S. V. Molodtsov, A. M. Snigirev, and G. M. Zinovjev,

643: Yad. Fiz. in press (2002);\\

644: hep-ph/0004212.

645: %8

646: \bibitem{abr}

647: A. A. Abrikosov, Jr., Nucl. Phys. {\bf B182} 441 (1981); Yad. Fiz. 

648: {\bf 37}, 772, (1983);\\

649: C. A. Carvalho, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 183} 182 (1981).

650: %9

651: \bibitem{tH}

652: G. 't Hooft, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 14}, 3432 (1976).

653: %10

654: \bibitem{we}

655: S. V. Molodtsov, A. M. Snigirev, and G. M. Zinovjev,

656: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 60} 056006 (1999);\\

657: S. V. Molodtsov, A. M. Snigirev, and G. M. Zinovjev,

658: {\it in Lattice Fermions and Structure\\ 

659: of the Vacuum},

660: edited by V. Mitrjushkin and G. Schierholz, 

661: (Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2000) p 307;\\

662: S. V. Molodtsov, A. M. Snigirev, and G. M. Zinovjev, Yad. Fiz. {\bf 63},

663: 975 (2000).

664: %11

665: \bibitem{dp2}

666: D. I. Diakonov, M. V. Polyakov, and C. Weiss,

667: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 461}, 539 (1996);\\

668: D. I. Diakonov, hep-ph/9802298.

669: %12

670: \bibitem{rapp}

671: R. Rapp, T. Sch\"afer, E. V. Shuryak, and M. Velkovsky, 

672: Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) {\bf 280}, (2000) 35. 

673: %13

674: \bibitem{diakcar}

675: G. W. Carter and D. I. Diakonov, Phys. Rew. D {\bf 60}, 016004 (1999).

676: \end{thebibliography}

677: 

678: \end{document}

679: 

680: 

681: