1: \documentclass[11pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{moriond,epsfig}
3: %\documentstyle[11pt,moriond,epsfig]{article}
4:
5:
6: \bibliographystyle{unsrt}
7: % for BibTeX - sorted numerical labels by order of
8: % first citation.
9:
10: % A useful Journal macro
11: \def\Journal#1#2#3#4{{#1} {\bf #2}, #3 (#4)}
12:
13: % Some useful journal names
14: \def\NCA{{\em Nuovo Cimento}}
15: \def\NIM{{\em Nucl. Instrum. Methods}}
16: \def\NIMA{{\em Nucl. Instrum. Methods} A}
17: \def\NPB{{\em Nucl. Phys.} B}
18: \def\PLB{{\em Phys. Lett.} B}
19: \def\PRL{{\em Phys. Rev. Lett.}}
20: \def\PRD{{\em Phys. Rev.} D}
21: \def\ZPC{{\em Z. Phys.} C}
22:
23: % Some other macros used in the sample text
24: \def\st{\scriptstyle}
25: \def\sst{\scriptscriptstyle}
26: \def\mco{\multicolumn}
27: \def\epp{\epsilon^{\prime}}
28: \def\vep{\varepsilon}
29: \def\ra{\rightarrow}
30: \def\ppg{\pi^+\pi^-\gamma}
31: \def\vp{{\bf p}}
32: \def\ko{K^0}
33: \def\kb{\bar{K^0}}
34: \def\al{\alpha}
35: \def\ab{\bar{\alpha}}
36: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
37: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
38: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}
39: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
40: \def\CPbar{\hbox{{\rm CP}\hskip-1.80em{/}}}
41: %temp replacement due to no font
42: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
43: % %
44: % BEGINNING OF TEXT %
45: % %
46: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
47: \begin{document}
48: \vspace*{4cm}
49: \title{DO THE $\pi N$ TOTAL CROSS SECTIONS INCREASE LIKE
50: log $\nu$ OR (log $\nu )^2$\\ AT HIGH ENERGIES ?\
51: \footnote{Talk presented at Rencontres de Moriond on QCD and
52: Hadronic Interactions, March 16-23, 2002}}
53:
54: \author{(Presented by Keiji Igi)\\
55: K. Igi and M. Ishida$^*$}
56:
57: \address{Department of Information Science, Kanagawa University, Hiratsuka\\
58: Kanagawa 259-1293, Japan\\
59: $^*$Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology\\
60: Tokyo 152-8551, Japan}
61:
62: \maketitle\abstracts{
63: We propose to use rich informations on $\pi p$ total cross sections below
64: $N(\sim 10$ GeV) in order to investigate whether these cross sections increase
65: like log $\nu$ or (log $\nu )^2$ at high energies. A finite-energy sum rule (FESR)
66: which is derived in the spirit of the $P^\prime$ sum rule as well as the $n=1$ moment
67: FESR have been required to constrain the high-energy parameters. We then searched
68: for the best fit of $\sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}$ above 70 GeV
69: in terms of high-energy parameters
70: constrained by these two FESR. We can conclude that our analysis strongly favours
71: the (log $\nu )^2$ behaviors satisfying the Froissart unitarity bound.}
72:
73:
74:
75:
76: As is well-known, the sum of $\pi^+ p$ and $\pi^- p$ total cross sections
77: has a tendency to increase above 70 GeV
78: experimentally\cite{rf1}.
79: It has not been known\cite{Cudell}, however, if this increase behaves like log $\nu$
80: or log$^2$ $\nu$ consistent with the Froissart bound.\cite{rf2}
81:
82: We would like to propose to use rich informations of $\pi p$
83: total cross sections at low and intermediate energy regions in order to
84: investigate the high energy behaviours of $\pi p$ total cross sections above
85: 70 GeV using new finite-energy sum rules (FESR) as constraints.
86:
87: Such a kind of attempt has been initiated in Ref.~\cite{rf3}.
88: The $s$-wave $\pi N$ scattering length $a^{(+)}$ of the crossing-even amplitude had been
89: expressed as
90: \begin{eqnarray}
91: \left( 1+\frac{\mu}{M} \right) a^{(+)} &=& -\frac{g_r^2}{4\pi}\left( \frac{\mu}{2M} \right)^2
92: \frac{1}{M} \frac{1}{1-(\frac{\mu}{2M})^2} +\frac{1}{2\pi^2}\int_0^\infty dk
93: [\sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}(k)-\sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}(\infty )]\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
94: \label{eq1}
95: \end{eqnarray}
96: with pion mass $\mu$ under the assumption that there are no singularities
97: with the vacuum quantum numbers in the $J$ plane except for the Pomeron $(P)$.
98: The evidence that this sum rule had not been satisfied led us to the prediction of the
99: $P^\prime$ trajectory with $\alpha_{P^\prime}\approx 0.5$, and
100: soon the $f$ meson ($f_2(1275)$)
101: has been uncovered on this $P^\prime$ trajectory.\\
102:
103: \hspace*{-0.8cm}(\underline{\it FESR(1)}): Taking into account
104: the present situation of increasing total cross section data,
105: we derive FESR in the spirit of the $P^\prime$ sum rule\cite{rf3}.
106: We consider the
107: crossing-even (spin-averaged) forward scattering amplitude for $\pi p$ scattering\cite{rf4}
108: \begin{eqnarray}
109: f^{(+)}(\nu ) &=& \frac{1}{4\pi} [ A^{(+)}(\nu )+\nu B^{(+)}(\nu ) ] .
110: \label{eq2}
111: \end{eqnarray}
112: We assume
113: \begin{eqnarray}
114: {\rm Im}\ f^{(+)}(\nu ) & \simeq & {\rm Im}\ R(\nu )+{\rm Im}\ f_{P^\prime}(\nu ) \nonumber\\
115: &=& \frac{\nu}{\mu^2}\left( c_0+c_1 {\rm log}\ \frac{\nu}{\mu}
116: + c_2 {\rm log}^2\ \frac{\nu}{\mu} \right)
117: +\frac{\beta_{P^\prime}}{\mu} \left( \frac{\nu}{\mu} \right)^{\alpha_{P^\prime}}
118: \label{eq3}
119: \end{eqnarray}
120: at high energies $(\nu \geq N)$.
121: Taking into account the amplitude $f^{(+)}(\nu )$ to be crossing-even.
122: we can derive (for a detail see ref. \cite{rfIM} )
123: \begin{eqnarray}
124: {\rm Re}\ f^{(+)}(\mu ) &=& {\rm Re}\ R(\mu) + {\rm Re}\ f_{P^\prime}(\mu)
125: -\frac{g_r^2}{4\pi}\left(\frac{\mu}{2M}\right)^2\frac{1}{M}\frac{1}{1-(\frac{\mu}{2M})^2} \nonumber\\
126: &&+\frac{1}{2\pi^2}\int_0^{\overline{N}} \sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}(k) dk
127: -\frac{2P}{\pi}\int_0^N \frac{\nu}{k^2}
128: \left\{
129: {\rm Im}\ R(\nu )+\frac{\beta_{P^\prime}}{\mu}
130: \left(\frac{\nu}{\mu}\right)^{0.5} \right\} d\nu \ ,\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
131: \label{eq8}
132: \end{eqnarray}
133: where $\overline{N}\equiv \sqrt{N^2-\mu^2} \simeq N$.
134: Let us call Eq.~(\ref{eq8}) as the FESR(1) which we use as the first
135: constraint. It is important to notice that Eq.~(\ref{eq8}) reduces to
136: the $P^\prime$ sum rule in ref.\cite{rf3} if $c_1,\ c_2\rightarrow 0$.
137:
138: The FESR (\cite{rf5}, \cite{rf6}, \cite{rf7})
139: \begin{eqnarray}
140: \int_0^N d\nu \ \nu^n {\rm Im}\ f(\nu ) &=& \sum_i \beta_i \frac{N^{\alpha_i+n+1}}{\alpha_i+n+1}
141: \label{eq88}
142: \end{eqnarray}
143: holds for even positive integer $n$ when $f(\nu )$ is crossing odd,
144: and holds for odd positive integer $n$ when $f(\nu )$ is crossing even.
145: We can also derive negative-integer moment FESR.
146: The only significant FESR is a one for $f^{(+)}(\nu )/\nu $ corresponding to $n=-1$.
147: FESR(1) belongs to this case.\\
148:
149: \hspace*{-0.8cm}(\underline{\it FESR(2)}): The second FESR corresponding to $n=1$ is:
150: \begin{eqnarray}
151: \pi\mu \left( \frac{g_r^2}{4\pi} \right) \left( \frac{\mu}{2M} \right)^3
152: &+& \frac{1}{4\pi}\int_0^{\overline{N}}dk\ k^2\sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}(k) \nonumber\\
153: &=& \int_0^N \nu {\rm Im}\ R(\nu ) d\nu + \int_0^N \nu {\rm Im}\ f_{P^\prime}(\nu )d\nu\ \ .
154: \label{eq9}
155: \end{eqnarray}
156: We call Eq.~(\ref{eq9}) as the FESR(2). It is to be noticed that the contribution from
157: higher energy regions is enhanced. \\
158:
159: \hspace*{-0.8cm}(\underline{\it Data})\ \ The numerical value of
160: $-\frac{g_r^2}{4\pi}\left(\frac{\mu}{2M}\right)^2
161: \frac{1}{M}\frac{1}{1-(\frac{\mu}{2M})^2}
162: =-0.0854$GeV$^{-1}$, $\pi \mu \frac{g_r^2}{4\pi} \left( \frac{\mu}{2M} \right)^3=0.0026$GeV
163: have been evaluated using $\frac{g_r^2}{4\pi}=14.4$.
164: Re $f^{(+)}(\mu )=\left( 1+\frac{\mu}{M} \right) a^{(+)}
165: =\left( 1+\frac{\mu}{M} \right) \frac{1}{3}(a_{\frac{1}{2}}+2a_{\frac{3}{2}})
166: =-(0.014\pm 0.026)$GeV$^{-1}$ was obtained from\cite{rf8}
167: $a_{\frac{1}{2}}=(0.171\pm 0.005)\mu^{-1}$
168: and $a_{\frac{3}{2}}=-(0.088\pm 0.004)\mu^{-1}$.
169:
170: We have used rich data\cite{rf1} of $\sigma^{\pi^+ p}$ and $\sigma^{\pi^- p}$
171: to evaluate the relevant integrals of cross sections
172: % of $\sigma^{(+)}_{\rm tot}(k)$ and $k^2\sigma^{(+)}_{\rm tot}(k)$
173: %(where $\sigma^{(+)}_{\rm tot}=(\sigma^{\pi^+ p}+\sigma^{\pi^- p})/2$)
174: appearing in FESR(1) and (2). We have obtained
175: ${\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi^2}\int_0^{\overline{N}} dk\
176: \sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}(k) }=38.75\pm0.25$ GeV$^{-1}$,
177: ${\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi}\int_0^{\overline{N}} dk\ k^2
178: \sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}(k) }=1817\pm$31 GeV for $\overline{N}=10$ GeV.
179: For a detail, see ref. \cite{rfIM}.\\
180:
181: \hspace*{-0.8cm}(\underline{\it Analysis})\ \ The FESR(1) and (2) are our
182: starting points. Armed with these two, we expressed high-energy parameters
183: $c_0$, $c_1$, $c_2$,
184: $\beta_{P^\prime}$ in terms of the Born term and the $\pi N$ scattering length $a^{(+)}$
185: as well as the total cross sections up to $N$. We then attempt to
186: fit the $\sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}$ above 70GeV. We set $N=10GeV$.
187:
188: Let us first define the log$^2\nu$ model and the log $\nu$ model.
189: The log$^2\nu$ model is a model for which the imaginary part of $f^{(+)}(\nu )$
190: behaves as $a+b\ {\rm log}\ \nu+c({\rm log}\ \nu)^2$ as $\nu$ becomes large\cite{KN75}.
191: The log $\nu$ model is a model for which the imaginary part of $f^{(+)}(\nu )$
192: behaves as $a^\prime +b^\prime\ {\rm log}\ \nu$ for large $\nu$.
193: So we generally assume that the Im $f^{(+)}(\nu )$ behaves as Eq.~(\ref{eq3})
194: at high energies $(\nu\geq N)$.\\
195: {\bf (1) log $\nu$ model}:\ \ This model has three parameters
196: $c_0$, $c_1$ and $\beta_{P^\prime}$ with two constraints FESR (1), (2).
197: We set $N=10$GeV and expressed
198: both $c_0$, $\beta_{P^\prime}$ as a function of $c_1$ using the FESR(1) and (2).
199: We obtained
200: \begin{eqnarray}
201: c_0(c_1) &=& 0.0879-4.94c_1,\ \ \beta_{P^\prime}(c_1) = 0.1290-7.06c_1\ .
202: \label{eq12}
203: \end{eqnarray}
204: We then tried to fit 12 data points of $\sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}(k)$
205: between 70GeV and 340GeV. The best fit we obtained is $c_1=0.00185$
206: which gives $c_0=0.0787$ and $\beta_{P^\prime}=0.142$ with the bad
207: ``reduced $\chi^2$,"
208: $\chi^2/(N_{\rm data}-N_{\rm param})=29.03/(12-1)\simeq 2.6$.
209: Therefore it turned out that this model has difficulties to reproduce
210: the experimental increase of $\pi p$ total cross sections above 70GeV.
211:
212: \hspace*{-0.8cm}{\bf (2) log$^2$ $\nu$ model}:\ \
213: This model has four parameters $c_0$, $c_1$, $c_2$ and $\beta_{P^\prime}$
214: with two constraints FESR(1),(2).
215: We again set $N=10$GeV and required both FESR(1) and (2) as constraints.
216: Then $c_0$, $\beta_{P^\prime}$ are expressed as functions of $c_1$ and $c_2$ as
217: \begin{eqnarray}
218: c_0(c_1,c_2) &=& 0.0879-4.94c_1-21.50c_2,\ \
219: \beta_{P^\prime}(c_1,c_2) = 0.1290-7.06c_1-41.46c_2 .\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
220: \label{eq13}
221: \end{eqnarray}
222: We then searched for the fit to 12 data points of $\sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}(k)$
223: above 70GeV. The best fit in terms of two parameters $c_1$ and $c_2$ led us
224: to greatly improved value of ``reduced $\chi^2$,"
225: $\chi^2/(N_{\rm data}-N_{\rm param})=0.746/(12-2)\simeq 0.075$ for
226: $c_1=-0.0215<0$ and $c_2=0.00182>0$ which give
227: $c_0=0.155$ and $\beta_{P^\prime}=0.0574$.
228: This is an excellent fit to the data.
229:
230: It is remarkable to notice that the wide range of data ($k\geq 5$GeV)
231: have been reproduced within the error even in the region where the fit
232: has not been made (see Fig. 1 (a) and (b)). It is also important to
233: note that the results do not change so much for the value of $N$.
234: The increase of $\sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}$ above 50 GeV
235: is explained via log$^2$ $\nu/\mu$ $(c_2>0)$ and the decrease between
236: $5\sim 50$GeV is explained by log $\nu/\mu$ ($c_1<0$).
237:
238: Therefore, we can conclude that our analysis based on the FESR(1),(2)
239: strongly favours
240: the log$^2$ $\nu/\mu$ behaviours satisfying the
241: Froissart unitarity bound.\\
242:
243:
244: \hspace*{-0.8cm}\underline{\it Note added in proof.}-- After completing
245: the manuscript, we were informed by Dr. Jurgen Engelfried that the SELEX
246: collaboration, U.~Dersch et al. $[$ Nucl.~Phys.~{\bf B579} (2000) 277 $]$
247: had a datum for $\pi^- N$ at 610 GeV. Our log$^2\ \nu$ model predicts
248: 25.9mb for $\sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}$ at 610GeV which is consistent with
249: their value on $\pi^- N$, $(26.6\pm 0.9)$mb .
250: We were also informed by Dr. Bararab Nicolescu that COMPETE collaboration,
251: J.~R.~Cudell et al. $[$hep-ph/0107219$]$ also reached a similar conclusion that the
252: Froissart bound seemed favoured by completely different approach. We also
253: came to know from a talk at the 37th Moriond Conference (March 16-23, 2002)
254: by Dr.~F.~D.~Steffen that the gluon saturation leads to log$^2\ \nu$ behaviours
255: at high energy $[$ A.~I.~Shoshi, F.~D.~Steffen and H.~J.~Pirner,
256: hep-ph/0202012 $]$.
257:
258:
259: \begin{figure}
260: \epsfxsize=14. cm
261: % \epsfysize=10. cm
262: %%\figurebox{16cm}{10cm}
263: \centerline{\epsffile{fig2.eps}}
264: \caption{Fit to the $\sigma_{\rm tot}^{(+)}$ data above 70GeV
265: by the log$^2$ $\nu$ model.
266: The dashed line represents the contribution from Im $R(\nu )$ with $c_2>0$.}
267: \end{figure}
268:
269: \newpage
270:
271: \section*{References}
272: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
273: \bibitem{rf1} Particle Data Group, D. E. Groom et al.,
274: {\em Eur. Phys. J. C} {\bf 15} (2000) 235.
275: \bibitem{Cudell} J.~R.~Cudell et al., \PRD\ {\bf 61} (2000) 034019.
276: \bibitem{rf2} M. Froissart, {\em Phys. Rev.}\ {\bf 123} (1961) 1053.\\
277: A.~Martin, \NCA\ {\bf 42} (1966) 930.
278: \bibitem{rf3} K.~Igi, \PRL\ {\bf 9} (1962) 76.
279: \bibitem{rf4} G.~F.~Chew, M.~L.~Goldberger, F.~E.~Low and Y.~Nambu,
280: {\em Phys.~Rev.}~{\bf 106} (1957) 1337.
281: \bibitem{rfIM} K.~Igi and M.~Ishida, hep-ph/0202163.
282: \bibitem{rf5} K.~Igi and S.~Matsuda, \PRL\ {\bf 18} (1967) 625.
283: \bibitem{rf6} A.~A.~Logunov, L.~D.~Soloviev and A.~N.~Tavkhelidze,
284: {\em Phys.~Lett.}~{\bf 24B} (1967) 181.
285: \bibitem{rf7} R.~Dolen, D.~Horn and C.~Schmid,
286: \PRL\ {\bf 19} (1967) 402; {\em Phys.~Rev.}~{\bf 166} (1968) 1768.
287: \bibitem{rf8} R.~K.~Bhaduri,``Models of the Nucleon,"
288: Addison Wesley pub., 1988, p.134.
289: \bibitem{KN75} K.~Kang and B.~Nicolescu, \PRD\ {\bf 11} (1975) 2461.
290: \end{thebibliography}
291:
292: \end{document}
293:
294: