1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %%
3: %% ws-ijmpa.tex : 22-05-2001
4: %% TeX file (sample coded file) to use with ws-ijmpa.cls for journal IJMPA
5: %% (size 9.75'' x 6.5'') to be published by World Scientific Publishing Co.
6: %% written in Latex2e by R. Sankaran & S. Sundaresan
7: %%
8: %% Suggestion/comments to:
9: %% ykoh@wspc.com.sg, ssundar@wspc.com.sg
10: %%
11: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
12: %%
13: %%
14:
15: %%International Journal of Modern Physics A --- IJMPA %%%%%
16:
17:
18:
19: \documentclass{ws-ijmpa}
20:
21: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{0.95}
22:
23: \begin{document}
24:
25:
26: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% To switch off trimmarks %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
27: %
28:
29: \def\nocropmarks{\vskip5pt\phantom{cropmarks}}
30:
31: \let\trimmarks\nocropmarks %%% Pls. remove the comment sign (%) to switch off the trimmarks
32:
33: %
34: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
35:
36:
37:
38: \markboth{X.-Q. Li, X.-B. Zhang \& B.-Q. Ma} {Strange Sea
39: Asymmetry in Nucleons}
40:
41: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Publisher's Area please ignore %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
42: %
43: \catchline{}{}{}
44: %
45: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
46:
47: \setcounter{page}{1}
48:
49:
50: \title{%Asymmetry of Strange Sea in Nucleons
51: STRANGE SEA ASYMMETRY IN NUCLEONS\footnote{ Talk presented at the
52: Third Circum-Pan-Pacific Symposium on ``High Energy Spin Physics",
53: Oct.~8-13, 2001, Beijing, China. This work is partially supported
54: by the National Natural Science Foundation of China. } }
55:
56: \author{\footnotesize XUE-QIAN LI$^{1}$, XIAO-BING ZHANG$^{1}$ and BO-QIANG
57: MA$^{2}$}
58: %\footnote{
59: %Typeset names in
60: %10 pt roman, uppercase. Use the footnote to indicate the
61: %present or permanent address of the author.}}
62:
63: \address{$^{1}$Department of Physics, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071,
64: China\\
65: \vspace{0.6mm} $^{2}$Department of Physics, Peking University,
66: Beijing 100871, China}
67: % \footnote{State completely without abbreviations, the
68: %affiliation and mailing address, including country. Typeset in 8
69: %pt italic.} }
70:
71: %\author{SECOND AUTHOR}
72:
73: %\address{Group, Laboratory, Address\\
74: %City, State ZIP/Zone, Country
75: %}
76:
77: \maketitle
78:
79: %\pub{Received (received date)}{Revised (revised date)}
80:
81: \begin{abstract}
82: We evaluate the medium effects in nucleon which can induce an
83: asymmetry of the strange sea. The short-distance effects
84: determined by the weak interaction can give rise to $\delta
85: m\equiv \Delta m_s-\Delta m_{\bar s}$ where $\Delta m_{s(\bar s)}$
86: is the medium-induced mass of strange quark by a few KeV at most,
87: but the long-distance effects by strong interaction could be
88: sizable.
89: \end{abstract}
90:
91: %\section{General Appearance} %) A SECTION HEADING
92:
93: \section*{~}
94: \vspace{-7mm}
95:
96: %\noindent (1)
97: %The existence of the Dirac sea is always an interesting topic
98: %which all theorist and experimentalists of high energy physics are
99: %intensively pursuing, and the strange content of the nucleon sea
100: %is of particular interest for attention.
101: The strange content of the nucleon is under particular attention
102: by the high energy physics society recently. Ji and Tang\cite{Ji}
103: suggested that if a small locality of strange sea in nucleon is
104: confirmed, some phenomenological consequences can be resulted in.
105: The CCFR data\cite{CCFR} indicate that $s(x)/\bar s(x)\sim
106: (1-x)^{-0.46\pm 0.87}$. Assuming an asymmetry between $s$ and
107: $\bar s$, Ji and Tang analyzed the CCFR data and concluded that
108: $m_s=260\pm 70$ MeV and $m_{\bar s}=220\pm 70$ MeV\cite{Ji}. So if
109: only considering the central values, $\delta m\equiv m_s-m_{\bar
110: s}\sim 40$ MeV. In the framework of the Standard Model
111: $SU(3)_c\otimes SU(2)_L\otimes U(1)_Y$, we would like to look for
112: some possible mechanisms which can induce the asymmetry.
113:
114: The self-energy of strange quark and antiquark $\Sigma_{s(\bar
115: s)}=\Delta m_{s(\bar s)}$ occurs via loops where various
116: interactions contribute to $\Sigma_{s(\bar s)}$ through the
117: effective vertices. Obviously, the QCD interaction cannot
118: distinguish between $s$ and $\bar s$, neither the weak interaction
119: alone in fact. Practical calculation of the self-energy also shows
120: that $\Delta m_s=\Delta m_{\bar s}$. In fact, because of the CPT
121: theorem, $s$ and $\bar s$ must be of exactly the same mass.
122:
123: If we evaluate the self-energy $\Delta m_s$ and $\Delta m_{\bar
124: s}$ in vacuum, the CPT theorem demands $\Delta m_s\equiv \Delta
125: m_{\bar s}$. However, when we evaluate them in an asymmetric
126: environment of nucleons, an asymmetry $\Delta^{M} m_s\neq
127: \Delta^{M} m_{\bar s}$ where the superscript $M$ denotes the
128: medium effects, can be expected. In other words, we suggest that
129: the asymmetry of the $u$ and $d$ quark composition in nucleons
130: leads to an asymmetry of the strange sea.
131:
132: There exist both short-distance and long-distance medium effects.
133: The short-distance effects occur at quark-gauge boson level,
134: namely a self-energy loop including a quark-fermion line and a
135: W-boson line or a tadpole loop. The contributions of $u$ and
136: $d$-types of quark-antiquark to the asymmetry realize through the
137: Kabayashi-Maskawa-Cabibbo mixing.
138:
139: The calculations at the parton-$W(Z)$ level is trustworthy,
140: because it is carried out in the standard framework which has been
141: proved to be correct. One does not suspect its validity and trusts
142: that this mechanism can cause an asymmetry of the strange sea in
143: nucleons. However, later we will show that it can only result in a
144: $\delta m$ of order of a few KeV, much below what we need for
145: phenomenology.
146:
147: Accepting the value of $\delta m$ achieved by fitting data as
148: about 40 MeV, one has to look for other mechanisms which can
149: bring up larger $\delta m$. Obviously the smallness of $\delta m$
150: is due to the heavy $W$ or $Z$ bosons in the propagators. and
151: they are responsible for the weak interaction. We would ask if the
152: strong interaction can get involved, if yes, it definitely
153: enhances the $\delta m$ by orders. However, the parton-gluon
154: interaction cannot lead to the asymmetry, because gluon is
155: flavor-blind. Thus the perturbative QCD where gluons are exchanged
156: between partons does not apply in this case. A natural extension
157: would be that the long-distance interaction may result in a larger
158: asymmetry. It is generally believed that the long-distance effects
159: exist at the quark level, but the realm is fully governed by the
160: non-perturbative QCD, so the question is how to evaluate the
161: long-distance effects.
162:
163: In fact, Brodsky and one of us proposed a meson-baryon resonance
164: mechanism and they suggested that the sea quark-antiquark
165: asymmetries are generated by a light-cone model of energetically
166: favored meson-baryon fluctuations\cite{Brodsky}.
167:
168: We try to re-evaluate the asymmetry from another angle, namely, we
169: consider the interaction of quark(parton)-meson. Here there is a
170: principal problem that the parton picture was introduced for high
171: energy processes where partons are treated massless compared to
172: the involved energy scale. That is an self-consistent picture
173: where the chiral symmetry is respected. Can the picture enclose
174: the quark-meson interaction is still a puzzle. But as the
175: phenomenology suggests, the long-distance strong interaction
176: should apply in this case, there can be possibility to treat the
177: quark-meson interaction as for the constituent-quark-meson
178: interaction, even though at this energy scale (the invariant
179: masses of the mesons) the chiral symmetry is broken. There is
180: another reason to believe the picture that the pseudoscalar mesons
181: $\pi$, $K$ etc. are composite of SU(3) quarks and antiquarks, but
182: also are the Goldstine bosons, so they must satisfy the
183: Bethe-Salpeter equation and the Dyson-Schwinger equation
184: simultaneously. The picture may become self-consistent when the
185: non-perturbative QCD effects can be properly regarded. At this
186: stage we just postulate that we can apply the chiral lagrangian to
187: treat the quark-meson interaction where the sea quark(antiquark)
188: and valence quarks are all included.
189:
190: Many authors employed this scenario to estimate various flavor
191: asymmetries and spin contents\cite{eich,cheng,szcz}, where the sea
192: quarks(antiquarks) make substantial contributions. However, in
193: Ref.~4,
194: %\cite{eich},
195: the constituent quark mass of 340 MeV was employed, whereas, in
196: Ref.~5,
197: %\cite{cheng},
198: the current quark mass relation $m_s/\hat
199: m=25$ is used where $\hat m$ is the mass of the light quarks ($u$
200: and $d$). This discrepancy still comes from lack of solid
201: knowledge on the non-perturbative QCD. In our work, we vary the
202: quark masses and see how the numerical values change. Our results
203: indicate that the difference for various quark masses is not too
204: remarkable.
205:
206: For the valence and sea quark picture, one has to use the quark
207: distribution function which has obvious statistical meaning. Here
208: instead of the commonly used distribution function, we adopt the
209: distribution with finite medium temperature and density. The
210: temperature involved in the distribution is only a parameter which
211: characterizes the inner motion state of the quarks (valence and
212: sea) and has the order of $\Lambda_{QCD}$. In practice, we let the
213: temperature vary within a reasonable range $100 \to 300$ MeV. The
214: advantage of using the finite temperature field theory is obvious.
215: First, the theory is well-established and then the calculations
216: are simple and straightforward.
217:
218: %\\
219: %\noindent (2)
220: We are going to employ the familiar formulation of the Quantum
221: Field Theory at finite temperature and density. As well-known, the
222: thermal propagator of quarks can be written as %\cite{ftft}
223: \begin{equation}
224: \label{pro} iS_q(k)=\frac{i(\rlap /k+m_q)}{k^2-m_q^2}-2\pi(\rlap
225: /k+m_q)\delta(k^2-m_q^2)f_F(k\cdot u),
226: \end{equation}
227: where $u_\mu$ is the four-vector for the medium and $f_F$ denotes
228: the Fermi-Dirac distribution function
229: \begin{equation}\label{ff}
230: f_F(x)={\theta(x)\over e^{\beta(x-\mu)}+1}+{\theta(-x)\over
231: e^{-\beta (x-\mu)} +1},
232: \end{equation}
233: and $\beta=1/kT$, $\mu$ is the chemical potential. We notice that
234: the first term of Eq.~(\ref{pro}) is just the quark propagator in
235: the vacuum. Its contribution to $\Sigma_1$ is of no importance to
236: us because this is related to the wave-function renormalization of
237: the quark in the vacuum. We focus on the medium effect, which
238: comes from the second term of Eq.~(\ref{pro}). For up and down
239: flavors, we have $n_u-n_{\bar u}=2/ V_{eff}$ and $n_d-n_{\bar
240: d}=1/ V_{eff}$
241: %\begin{equation}
242: %n_u-n_{\bar u}={2\over V_{eff}}, \,\,\,\, n_d-n_{\bar d}={1\over
243: %V_{eff}},
244: %\end{equation}
245: in proton while $n_u-n_{\bar u}=1/ V_{eff}$ and $n_d-n_{\bar
246: d}=2/ V_{eff}$
247: %\begin{equation}
248: %n_u-n_{\bar u}={1\over V_{eff}}, \,\,\,\, n_d-n_{\bar d}={2\over
249: %V_{eff}},
250: %\end{equation}
251: in neutron.
252:
253:
254: For the short-distance contribution, the two contributions to the
255: self-energy of $s$-quark ($\bar s$) (a) and (b) are due to the
256: charged current ($W^{\pm}$) and neutral current respectively, the
257: later is usually called as the tadpole-diagram\cite{Pal}.
258:
259: The contribution due to the charged current is
260: \begin{equation}
261: \Sigma^{s}_1=\sqrt 2G_F\gamma^0L\sin^2\theta_C(n_u-n_{\bar u}),
262: \end{equation}
263: where $G_F$ is the Fermi coupling constant, $\theta_C$ is the
264: Cabibbo angle. The contribution due to the weak neutral current is
265: \begin{equation}
266: \Sigma^{s}_2=3\sqrt 2G_F(-1+{4\over
267: 3}Q^{(s)}\sin^2\theta_{_W})\cdot
268: \sum_f(T_3^{(f)}-2Q^{(f)}\sin^2\theta_{_W})(n_f-n_{\bar f}),
269: \end{equation}
270: where $Q^{(f)}$ refers to the charge of corresponding quark ($u$,
271: $d$, $s$). Pal and Pham pointed that the axial part of the neutral
272: current does not contribute\cite{Pal}.
273:
274: For the long-distance effects, in the calculations, we need an
275: effective vertex for $\bar sqM$ where $q$ can be either $u$ or
276: $d$-quarks and $M$ is a pseudoscalar or vector meson. Here we only
277: retain the lowest lying meson states such as $\pi,K,\rho$ etc. The
278: effective chiral Lagrangian for the interaction between quarks and
279: mesons has been derived by many authors\cite{Georgi,Yan}.
280:
281: In terms of these effective vertices, the long-distance medium
282: correction to the mass of strange quark can be evaluated and we
283: obtain
284: \begin{eqnarray} \label{m}
285: \Sigma_3^s &=& \gamma_0\frac{f^2_{kqs}}{2} [ (n_q-{n_{\bar q}}) +
286: \int \frac{d^3\mathbf{k}}{{(2\pi)}^3}
287: \frac{M_K^2}{m_s^2-2m_s \omega_k-M_K^2} f_F(\omega_k) \nonumber
288: \\& &-\int \frac{d^3\mathbf{k}}{{(2\pi)}^3} \frac{m_k^2}{m_s^2+2m_s
289: \omega_k-M_K^2}f_{F}(-\omega_k) ].
290: \end{eqnarray}
291: In order to avoid the pole in the second term of Eq.~(\ref{m}),
292: we use the familiar Breit-Wigner formulation.
293:
294: %\\
295: %\noindent (3)
296:
297: %(i)
298: Our numerical results show that for the short-distance effects,
299: $\delta m= 92\ {\rm eV} \to 0.8\ {\rm KeV}$ for proton and $\delta
300: m=0.38\ {\rm KeV} \to 3.0\ {\rm KeV}$ for neutron,
301: %$$\delta m= 92\ {\rm eV} \sim 0.8\ {\rm KeV}, \;\;\;\; {\rm for\; proton},$$
302: %$$\delta m=0.38\ {\rm KeV} \sim 3.0\ {\rm KeV}, \;\;\;\; {\rm for\; neutron},$$
303: in the range of the effective nucleon radius $R\approx0.5 \to 1.0$
304: fm.
305:
306: %(ii)
307: According to the picture of chiral field
308: theory\cite{eich,cheng,szcz}, the effective pseudovector coupling
309: implies $f_{kqs}=\frac{g_A}{\sqrt 2 f}$, where the axial-vector
310: coupling $g_A=0.75$. The pion decay constant $f_{\pi}=93$ MeV,
311: kaon decay constant $f_{K}=130$ MeV, for our estimation, an
312: approximate SU(3) symmetry might be valid, so that $f$ can be
313: taken as an average of $f_{\pi}$ and $f_K$. Thus we obtain $\delta
314: m\sim 10 \to 100$ MeV. One can trust that the order of the
315: effective coupling at the vertices does not deviate too much from
316: this value. More detailed analysis can be found in
317: Ref.~10.
318: %\cite{Li:2001nv}.
319: %\\
320:
321: %\noindent (4)
322: As a summary, we find that an asymmetry of the light quarks
323: %(u and d quarks) which exists
324: in nucleons can induce the expected asymmetry of the strange sea.
325: The short-distance effects are caused by the fundamental weak
326: interactions of the Standard Model, so that the corresponding
327: theoretical estimation of the asymmetry is more reliable, but due
328: to the heavy W(Z) bosons in the propagators, such effects can only
329: result in $\delta m$ of a few KeV. The main contribution to
330: $\delta m$ must come from the long-distance strong interaction, if
331: the phenomenological value of $\delta m$ is about 40 MeV as
332: determined by data. How to correctly evaluate such effects is the
333: key point, even though one can be convinced that the long-distance
334: effects should make a substantial contribution to $\delta m$.
335:
336: In the history, there has been a dispute whether the parton
337: picture and the quark-meson interaction compromise with each
338: other, and if they do coincide, how to properly apply the picture
339: to evaluate phenomenological quantities is still an open %unsolved
340: problem. In this work, we just calculate the asymmetry of the
341: strange sea by this picture and obtain an estimate which meets the
342: value range from data fitting. Therefore we may consider that this
343: scenario has certain plausibility and its applicability should be
344: further tested in other calculations. The studies along this line
345: are worth more attention, because it is of obvious
346: significance for theory and phenomenological applications.
347: %\\
348:
349:
350: %\section*{Acknowledgements}
351:
352: %This work is partially supported by the National Natural Science
353: %Foundation of China.
354:
355:
356:
357:
358: \begin{thebibliography}{0}
359: \bibitem{Ji} X. Ji and J. Tang, {\it Phys.\ Lett.\ } {\bf B362}, 182 (1995).
360: \bibitem{CCFR}
361: CCFR Collab., A.~O.~Bazarko {\it et al.}, {\it Z.\ Phys.\ } {\bf
362: C65}, 189 (1995).
363: \bibitem{Brodsky} S.J. Brodsky and B.-Q. Ma, {\it Phys.\ Lett.\ } {\bf B381}, 317
364: (1996).
365: \bibitem{eich} E.~J. Eichten, I. Hinchliffe and C. Quigg,
366: {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ } {\bf D45}, 2269 (1992).
367: \bibitem{cheng} T. P. Cheng and L. F. Li,
368: {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ } {\bf 74}, 2872 (1995).
369: \bibitem{szcz}
370: A. Szczurek, A. J. Buchmann and A. Faessler, {\it J.\ Phys.\ }
371: {\bf G22}, 1741 (1996).
372: \bibitem{Pal} P. Pal and T. Pham, {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ } {\bf D40}, 259 (1989).
373: %\bibitem{Ma} B. Ma, D. Rischke, W. Greiner and Q. Zhang,
374: %Phys.Lett. {\bf B315}
375: %(1993) 29.
376: \bibitem{Georgi} A. Manohar and H. Georgi, {\it Nucl.\ Phys.\ } {\bf
377: B234}, 189 (1984).
378: \bibitem{Yan} X. Wang and M. Yan, {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ } {\bf D62}, 094013
379: (2000).
380: \bibitem{Li:2001nv} X.-Q.~Li, X.-B.~Zhang and B.-Q.~Ma,
381: %``Asymmetry of strange sea in nucleons,''
382: {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ } {\bf D65}, 014003 (2002).
383: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0111183].
384: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0111183;%%
385:
386: \end{thebibliography}
387:
388: \end{document}
389: