1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

2: \usepackage{graphicx}

3: \usepackage{cite}

4: \textheight 24.cm

5: \textwidth 17.3cm

6: \topmargin -3.7cm

7: \hoffset -1.8cm

8: \headsep 1.5cm

9: \headheight 1.5cm

10: \newcommand{\dissum}[2]{\displaystyle \sum_{#1}^{#2}}

11: \newcommand{\fsml}[2]{\mbox{$\frac{#1}{#2}$}}

12: \newcommand{\fnd}[2]{\frac{\textstyle #1}{\textstyle #2}}

13: \newcommand{\xrm}[1]{{\textstyle \mbox{\rm #1}}}

14: \newcommand{\bm}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath $#1$}}

15: \newcommand{\abs}[1]{\left| #1\right|}

16: \newcommand{\ket}[1]{\mbox{$\left| #1\right\rangle$}}

17: \newcommand{\bracket}[2]{\mbox{$\left\langle #1\left| #2\right.\right

18: \rangle$}}

19: \newcommand{\braket}[3]{\mbox{$\left\langle #1\left|

20: #2\right| #3\right\rangle$}}

21: \newcommand{\bra}[1]{\mbox{$\left\langle #1\right|$}}

22: \newcommand{\x}[1]{{\textstyle #1}}

23: \newcommand{\Real}[1]{\Re {\it e}(#1 )}

24: \newcommand{\Imag}[1]{\Im {\it m}(#1 )}

25: \def\chie{\mbox{\raisebox{0.5ex}{$\chi$}}}

26: \begin{document} \baselineskip .7cm

27: \title{Reconciling the Light Scalar Mesons \\ with Breit-Wigner Resonances

28: as well as the Quark Model}

29: \author{

30: Eef van Beveren\\

31: {\normalsize\it Centro de F\'{\i}sica Te\'{o}rica}\\

32: {\normalsize\it Departamento de F\'{\i}sica, Universidade de Coimbra}\\

33: {\normalsize\it P-3000 Coimbra, Portugal}\\

34: {\small eef@teor.fis.uc.pt}\\ [.3cm]

35: \and

36: George Rupp\\

37: {\normalsize\it Centro de F\'{\i}sica das Interac\c{c}\~{o}es Fundamentais}\\

38: {\normalsize\it Instituto Superior T\'{e}cnico, Edif\'{\i}cio Ci\^{e}ncia}\\

39: {\normalsize\it P-1049-001 Lisboa Codex, Portugal}\\

40: {\small george@ajax.ist.utl.pt}\\ [.3cm]

41: {\small PACS number(s): 11.80.Et, 12.40.Yx, 13.75.Lb, 14.40.-n}

42: }

43: \maketitle

44: 

45: \begin{abstract}

46: Resonances appearing in hadronic scattering processes are described by a

47: two-phase model.

48: In the one phase, scattering products are observed, whereas the other phase

49: describes confinement. A so-called ``Resonance-Spectrum Expansion'' is

50: derived, containing expressions that resemble Breit-Wigner formulae.

51: This method also provides a straightforward explanation for the origin of the

52: light scalar mesons without requiring extra degrees of freedom.

53: \end{abstract}

54: 

55: \section{Introduction}

56: 

57: For more than three decades now, the light scalar mesons have been puzzling

58: both experimentalists

59: \cite{Montanet2003,NUCLEX0302007,HEPPH0301126,HEPPH0302137}

60: and theorists

61: \cite{HEPPH0210431,PLB559p49,HEPPH0212361,HEPPH0212117,HEPPH0302059,HEPPH0303248,HEPPH0304031,HEPPH0303223}.

62: On the experimental side, one is faced

63: with a highly disparate set of a few well-established, relatively narrow

64: resonances, as well as some very broad, seemingly non-Breit-Wigner-like

65: structures in $S$-wave meson-meson scattering. On the other hand, theory

66: appears to have tremendous difficulties in reproducing these states on the

67: basis of some microscopic quark substructure. For instance, the naive quark

68: model would describe these states as confined $P$-wave $q\bar{q}$ systems,

69: thus putting the masses of the lightest nonet at about 1.3 GeV upwards, and not

70: below 1 GeV as found experimentally.

71: 

72: The first consistent attempt to describe the lowest scalars as a usual meson

73: nonet was undertaken by R.~L.~Jaffe in 1977, in the framework of the MIT bag

74: model \cite{PRD15p267}. In this approach, the lightest exotic $q^2\bar{q}^2$

75: scalar states indeed form a nonet, and are therefore also called

76: crypto-exotics. Moreover, due to a very large, attractive color-magnetic

77: interaction term, the central mass values of the corresponding bag states are

78: shifted downwards several hundreds of MeV, thus being in rough agreement with

79: the real parts of the light scalar mesons listed in the PDG tables

80: \cite{PRD66p010001}, including the $f_0(600)$ or $\sigma$ meson, in those days

81: called the $\varepsilon$. However, it is not at all clear how to couple these

82: stable multiquark states to the physical thresholds, and especially what

83: influence this would have not only on the widths but also on the real part of

84: the spectrum. Then, in 1982, M.~D.~Scadron presented the first theoretical

85: description of the light scalars as a nonet of $q\bar{q}$ states

86: \cite{PRD26p239}. In this

87: work, the mechanism for producing light scalar mesons is the spontaneous

88: breaking of chiral symmetry, at the same time responsible for the vanishing of

89: the pion mass in the chiral limit. However, with the advent

90: of chiral perturbation theory (ChPT), the $\sigma$ and $\kappa$ mesons

91: fell out of favor, and for many years it was considered unnecessary, perhaps

92: even undesirable, to have a complete light scalar nonet. Only with the

93: undeniable mounting of experimental evidence, first for the $f_0(600)$

94: \cite{NPB320p1} and recently also for the $K_0^*(800)$ ($\kappa$)

95: \cite{HEPEX0204018}, many model builders started to rehabilitate the light

96: scalar nonet, even some ChPT practitioners \cite{PRD59p074001}. This

97: development also led to a revival of interest in our 1986 model prediction of

98: the complete light nonet, in a unitarized Schr\"{o}dinger formalism

99: \cite{ZPC30p615}.

100: 

101: In modern approaches towards fundamental interactions and scattering of

102: elementary particles, the Schr\"{o}dinger equation has become obsolete.

103: However, as we may learn from the long-standing difficulties involving the

104: light scalar mesons, an analysis based on the Schr\"{o}dinger equation, like

105: the one employed in  Refs.~\cite{ZPC30p615,EPJC22p493} can be very clarifying.

106: Unfortunately, it is then necessary to enter into the details of solving the

107: corresponding set of coupled second-order differential equations, a technique

108: which has become obsolete as well.

109: 

110: \begin{table}[ht]

111: \begin{center}

112: \begin{tabular}{|c|c||l|l|l|}

113: \hline\hline & & & & \\ [-0.3cm]

114: n & mass (MeV) & $I=1$ & $I=1/2$ & $I=0$ \\

115: \hline & & & & \\ [-0.3cm]

116: 0 & 1.4 & $a_{0}$(1450) \cite{PRD66p010001} &

117: $K^{\ast}_{0}$(1430) \cite{PRD66p010001} &

118: $f_{0}$(1370) \cite{PRD66p010001} $f_{0}$(1500) \cite{PRD66p010001} \\

119: & & $a_{1}$(1260) \cite{PRD66p010001} & &

120: $f_{1}$(1285) \cite{PRD66p010001} $f_{1}$(1420) \cite{PRD66p010001} \\

121: & & $a_{2}$(1320) \cite{PRD66p010001} &

122: $K^{\ast}_{2}$(1430) \cite{PRD66p010001} &

123: $f_{2}$(1270) \cite{PRD66p010001} $f_{2}$(1430) \cite{PRD66p010001} \\

124: \hline & & & & \\ [-0.3cm]

125: 1 & 1.75 & & $K^{\ast}_{0}$(1950) \cite{PRD66p010001} &

126: $f_{0}$(1710) \cite{PRD66p010001} $f_{0}$(1770) \cite{PLB449p154} \\

127: & & $a_{1}$(1640) \cite{PRD66p010001} & &

128: $f_{1}$(1510) \cite{PRD66p010001} \\

129: & & $a_{2}$(1700) \cite{PRD66p010001} &

130: $K^{\ast}_{2}$(1980) \cite{PRD66p010001} &

131: $f_{2}'$(1525) \cite{PRD66p010001}

132: $f_{2}$(1565) \cite{PRD66p010001} \\

133: & & & & $f_{2}$(1640) \cite{PRD66p010001}

134: $f_{2}$(1810) \cite{PRD66p010001}\\

135: \hline & & & & \\ [-0.3cm]

136: 2 & 2.1 & $a_{0}$(2025) \cite{PLB517p261} & &

137: $f_{0}$(2020) \cite{PRD66p010001}

138: $f_{0}$(2200) \cite{PRD66p010001} \\

139: & & & & \\

140: & & & & $f_{2}$(1910) \cite{PRD66p010001} $f_{2}$(1950) \cite{PRD66p010001} \\

141: & & & & $f_{2}$(2010) \cite{PRD66p010001} $f_{2}$(2150) \cite{PRD66p010001} \\

142: \hline & & & & \\ [-0.3cm]

143: 3 & 2.45 & & & $f_{0}$(2330) \cite{PRD66p010001} \\

144: & & & & \\

145: & & & &

146: $f_{2}$(2300) \cite{PRD66p010001} $f_{2}$(2340) \cite{PRD66p010001} \\

147: \hline\hline

148: \end{tabular}

149: \end{center}

150: \caption[]{\small The classification of the $J^{P}=(0,1,2)^{+}$

151: resonances as a function of radial excitation $n$.

152: The ground states have $n=0$.}

153: \label{f0}

154: \end{table}

155: 

156: In Table~\ref{f0}, we give a simple classification for the positive-parity

157: mesons, based on the model we describe in Sec.~\ref{coupledchannels}.

158: Each resonance is supposed to originate from a pure confined $q\bar{q}$

159: state, with quantum numbers $s=1$ for the total intrinsic $q\bar{q}$ spin,

160: and $\ell =1$ or 3 for the relative orbital angular momentum of the

161: $q\bar{q}$ pair. In Sec.~\ref{coupledchannels} we explain what we exactly mean

162: by \em ``originating from'', \em and how this can be consistently described

163: within a model for meson-meson scattering.

164: By just varying one model parameter, i.e., the coupling $\lambda$, letting it

165: decrease from its ``physical'' value $\lambda_{ph}$ towards zero,

166: the model's spectrum turns from the experimentally observed resonances

167: into a genuine $q\bar{q}$ confinement spectrum.

168: 

169: For the radial confinement spectrum we have chosen equal spacings in

170: Table~\ref{f0}, with level splittings of 350 MeV and a ground state ($n=0$) at

171: 1.4 GeV.

172: The $\ell =3$ radial excitations start out at 1.75 GeV.

173: Such a spectrum corresponds to the one of a harmonically oscillating

174: quark-antiquark pair. Harmonic confinement is not essential to our model, but

175: the cross sections, phase shifts and electromagnetic transition rates resulting

176: from the full model are in reasonable agreement with experiment

177: \cite{ZPC30p615,PRD27p1527,PRD44p2803}.

178: 

179: Non-strange ($n\bar{n}$) and strange ($s\bar{s}$) configurations

180: double the number of isoscalar states into $SU(3)$-flavor singlets

181: and octets. But one should be be aware that all states get mixed through the

182: meson loops in our model (see Sec.~\ref{QExchandMLoops}).

183: Hence, like in Nature we will not obtain pure angular, radial, or flavor

184: excitations in our model calculations.

185: 

186: In Table~\ref{radex} we have schematically indicated how many

187: states one must expect at each mass level, except for the ground

188: states where $\ell =3$ excitations are absent.

189: 

190: \begin{table}[ht]

191: \begin{center}

192: \begin{tabular}{|l||l|l|l|}

193: \hline\hline & & & \\ [-0.3cm]

194: & $I=1$ & $I=1/2$ & $I=0$ (singlet, octet)\\

195: \hline & & & \\ [-0.3cm]

196: & $a_{0}$ & $K^{\ast}_{0}$ &

197: $f_{0}{\{ 1\}}$ $f_{0}{\{ 8\}}$ \\

198: $\ell =1$ & $a_{1}$ & $K^{\ast}_{1}$ &

199: $f_{1}{\{ 1\}}$ $f_{1}{\{ 8\}}$ \\

200: & $a_{2}$ & $K^{\ast}_{2}$ &

201: $f_{2}{\{ 1\}}$ $f_{2}{\{ 8\}}$ \\

202: & & & \\ [-0.3cm]

203: \hline & & & \\ [-0.3cm]

204: $\ell =3$ & $a_{2}$ & $K^{\ast}_{2}$ &

205: $f_{2}{\{ 1\}}$ $f_{2}{\{ 8\}}$ \\ [0.2cm] \hline\hline

206: \end{tabular}

207: \end{center}

208: \caption[]{\small The expected number of $J^{P}=(0,1,2)^{+}$

209: meson resonances at each level of radial excitation.}

210: \label{radex}

211: \end{table}

212: 

213: Meson loops influence, moreover, the precise resonance shapes.

214: Some come out broad, others narrower,

215: Also, the central resonance positions may shift substantially (100--300 MeV)

216: with respect to the underlying $q\bar{q}$ confinement spectrum.

217: 

218: From Tables~\ref{f0} and \ref{radex} we may conclude that

219: the observed positive-parity mesonic resonances can easily be accommodated

220: in a quark model, contrary to what has been claimed in recent literature

221: \cite{PLB541p22,HEPPH0301012}.

222: Notice in particular the claim in Ref.~\cite{PLB541p22} that \em

223: ``far too many $0^{++}$ resonances were established,

224: to be accommodated in the ground-state scalar nonet'', \em

225: a few lines further on followed by the remark \em ``\ldots a missing state''.

226: \em Inspection of Table~\ref{f0} reveals that still many states are missing,

227: especially in the $I=1$ and $I=1/2$ sectors.

228: However, thanks to glueball searches we nowadays have a much better knowledge

229: of the $I=0$ sector than twenty years ago.

230: A classification of the mesonic resonances in this sector can

231: be satisfactorily achieved assuming quark degrees of freedom.

232: That does not necessarily imply the absence of other configurations.

233: From lattice calculations it is becoming clear that it may even be

234: very hard to disentangle the various configurations existing in $f_{0}$

235: systems \cite{HEPLAT0210012}.

236: Hence, the $f_{0}$s could, in principle, be mixtures of $q\bar{q}$,

237: glueballs \cite{HEPPH0302133},

238: $\left( q\bar{q}\right)^{2}$, meson-meson states, hybrids, etc.,

239: moreover in all possible color configurations.

240: Nevertheless, for the \em classification \em \/of positive-parity mesonic

241: resonances we only need quark degrees of freedom.

242: 

243: However, our table does not contain the light scalar mesons, that is, the

244: $f_0$(600) ($\sigma$ meson), the $f_0$(980) and $a_0$(980), and the recently

245: confirmed \cite{HEPEX0204018} $K_0^\ast$(800) ($\kappa$ meson). But we have

246: shown that such a complete nonet below 1 GeV is inevitable in the quark model,

247: due to the $^3P_0$ mechanism \cite{ZPC30p615,EPJC22p493}, besides the usual

248: nonet in the mass region 1.3--1.5 GeV, consisting of the $f_{0}$(1370),

249: $a_{0}$(1450), $K_{0}^{\ast}$(1430), and $f_{0}$(1500). Notwithstanding

250: the dissent about the correct interpretation of the individual states,

251: these two scalar nonets are the only ones that seem to be complete from the

252: experimental point of view.

253: Several members of the other nonets still have to be found.

254: Table~\ref{f0} shows in which energy region we expect the missing

255: $a_{0}$s and $K_{0}^{\ast}$s to be observed in experiment.

256: 

257: Let us now dwell somewhat more upon the understanding of the scalar mesons,

258: and compare their situation with positronium. Imagine a teacher asking his/her

259: students, after having added a fictitious ground state, to invent a theory

260: that explains the positronium spectrum.

261: Probably only the cleverest students will discover the malice of their

262: teacher. The others will invent whatever model it takes to get an explanation

263: for the false positronium spectrum. In the scalar-meson spectrum, at least two

264: such extra states seem to exist, namely the firmly established, relatively

265: narrow $f_{0}(980)$ and $a_{0}(980)$ resonances, which are therefore also the

266: most controversial states for theorists. As an illustration of the general

267: confusion here, let us just mention e.g.\ the ``$K\bar{K}$-molecule'' approach

268: of Ref.~\cite{PRL77p2332}, producing both the $f_0(980)$ and $a_0(980)$ as

269: dynamical meson-meson resonances due to \em strong $t$-channel

270: attraction \em \/in the $K\bar{K}$ system, the relativistic quark model of

271: Ref.~\cite{PLB361p160}, in which only the $f_0(980)$ is described as a

272: $q\bar{q}$ state, owing its low mass to a strong \em instanton-induced \em

273: \/interaction, whereas the $a_0(980)$ is supposed to be a $K\bar{K}$ molecule,

274: and finally the confining NJL model of Refs.~\cite{PRD63p014019,PRD65p114011},

275: which obtains

276: the $f_0(980)$ as well as the $a_0(980)$ as light $q\bar{q}$ scalars, thanks to

277: an attractive \em 't Hooft \em \/interaction (see, however,

278: Ref.~\cite{PRD65p078501}).  Without these two resonances,

279: the scalar meson spectrum would seem to start off with a ground state at about

280: 1.3 GeV and could then be simply explained by the naive quark model, provided

281: one assumed the very broad $\sigma(600)$ and $\kappa(800)$ resonances to be

282: of whatever dynamical, but not $q\bar{q}$ origin. On the other hand, if one

283: insists on taking the light scalars as the ground states of the spectrum, then,

284: at first sight, it seems very hard to achieve a unified description of all

285: scalar mesons, not to speak of including pseudoscalar, vector, and other

286: mesons, too.

287: 

288: The main purpose of the present paper is to demonstrate that it is really

289: possible to uniformly describe the whole nonet of light scalar mesons,

290: including the broad $\sigma$ and $\kappa$ structures, in a $^3P_0$-modified

291: Breit-Wigner-like framework, on the basis of $q\bar{q}$ and meson-meson degrees

292: of freedom only.  However, these states

293: will turn out to be \em not \em \/the naive ground states of the scalar-meson

294: spectrum \cite{ZPC30p615,EPJC22p493,EPJC10p469}. The formalism we shall use

295: is just the old-fashioned Schr\"{o}dinger equation, often considered

296: ``unworthy'' in hadronic physics nowadays, but which nonetheless is perfectly

297: suited to describe phenomena like (virtual) bound states, resonances, threshold

298: behavior, Riemann sheets, and so forth. Of course, we do not propose this

299: technique so as to substitute the modern nonperturbative methods for handling

300: QCD. It is just intended to pinpoint the structure of the scalar-meson

301: spectrum, and to show how powerful a simple, intuitive approach can be, as long

302: as one includes the relevant degrees of freedom. For that purpose, one

303: unavoidably has to go through some widely forgotten calculus, in order

304: to obtain an analytic expression for the $S$ matrix from a set of

305: coupled-channel equations. Therefore, we shall choose the simplest possible

306: interactions that still contain the essence of the physics, without eclipsing

307: the latter by a heap of opaque equations.

308: 

309: The organization of this paper is as follows. In Sec.~2 we formally present

310: the coupled-channel equations linking the confined $q\bar{q}$ sector to the

311: free two-meson sector. Section 3, in combination with Appendices A, B, and C,

312: is devoted to a detailed analytical derivation of the $S$ matrix and the

313: scattering phase shift for a two-channel model, with arbitrary confinement and

314: a delta-shell interaction to mimic the $^3P_0$ transitions between the

315: $q\bar{q}$ and meson-meson channels. The here derived formula, which we call

316: ``Resonance-Spectrum Expansion'', is central to the ensuing analysis in

317: the remainder of the paper. In Sec.~4 we discuss how to extract

318: results for bound states, resonances, and scattering observables from the

319: $S$ matrix for the full, multichannel model. In Sec.~5 we describe the general

320: connection between the discrete confinement spectrum and the $S$-matrix poles

321: corresponding to physical bound states and resonances, depending on the

322: threshold energies. Section~6 explains the difference in threshold behavior

323: of $S$-wave and $P$-wave poles. In Sec.~7 we present a detailed discussion

324: of the behavior of $S$-matrix poles, as a function of the relative momentum

325: $k$ or the energy $E$, for the light scalar mesons, in particular the

326: $K_0^*(800)$ and the $a_0(980)$. Our conclusions on the nature of the scalar

327: mesons are drawn in Sec.~8.

328: 

329: \section{Coupled channels}

330: \label{coupledchannels}

331: 

332: Let us consider a mesonic system which may appear in two different phases,

333: and a mechanism allowing transitions from one phase to the other.

334: In one phase the system consists of two noninteracting mesons, in the other

335: phase of two permanently bound particles representing a

336: quark-antiquark system.

337: We will refer to the former phase as {\it free}, to the latter as

338: {\it confined}.

339: The communication between the two  phases we describe through a short-range

340: potential $V_{t}$.

341: In the interaction region, which has the dimension of about 1 fm, we allow

342: both phases to coexist.

343: Hence, the wave function of such a system consists of two components there,

344: $\psi_{f}$ and $\psi_{c}$.

345: Outside the interaction region the confined component $\psi_{c}$ must, of

346: course, vanish rapidly.

347: This can be achieved by a potential $V_{c}$, rising to infinity

348: with distance, like the linear and the harmonic-oscillator potentials.

349: 

350: Let the Hamiltonians $H_{c}$ and $H_{f}$ describe the dynamics of

351: the phases of two permanently confined particles and of

352: two free particles, respectively. Then the following set of coupled

353: Schr\"{o}dinger equations describes the dynamics of the full system:

354: 

355: \begin{equation}

356: \left( E-H_{c}\right)\;\psi_{c}\left(\vec{r}\;\right)\; =\;

357: V_{t}\;\psi_{f}\left(\vec{r}\;\right)

358: \;\;\;\xrm{and}\;\;\;

359: \left( E-H_{f}\right)\;\psi_{f}\left(\vec{r}\;\right)\; =\;

360: \left[ V_{t}\right]^{T}\;\psi_{c}\left(\vec{r}\;\right)

361: \;\;\; .

362: \label{cpldeqn}

363: \end{equation}

364: 

365: Such a philosophy already underlied an elaborate coupled-channel quark

366: model \cite{ZPC30p615,PRD27p1527,CPC27p377,PRD21p772}, designed

367: to simultaneously describe mesonic bound-state spectra, resonances, and

368: meson-meson scattering. However, in spite of the model's success to reproduce

369: a host of experimental data with a very limited number of parameters, it is

370: not very suited for the point we wish to make in the present paper, owing to

371: the specific model choice of the confining $q\bar{q}$ potential, and

372: especially the rather complicated matrix expressions needed to obtain

373: $S$-matrix-related observables.

374: Thus, we shall use here an arbitrary confinement potential, and a

375: very simple transition potential $V_t$.

376: 

377: \section{Quark exchange and meson loops}

378: \label{QExchandMLoops}

379: 

380: When, as depicted in Fig~.\ref{qexch}, two interacting mesons exchange

381: a quark, the resulting system will consist of a valence quark-antiquark pair.

382: Whether this $q\bar{q}$ pair is going to form a resonance or not will depend

383: on the quantum numbers of the system and the total available energy.

384: 

385: \begin{figure}[ht]

386: \begin{center}

387: \begin{picture}(206,100)(-6,0)

388: \special{"

389: 0.5 setlinewidth

390: newpath -6 0 moveto

391: -6 100 lineto 200 100 lineto 200 0 lineto

392: closepath stroke}%

393: \special{"

394: 0.0 setlinewidth newpath 20 20 moveto 160 20 lineto

395: 160 30 lineto 120 30 lineto 120 70 lineto 160 70 lineto

396: 160 80 lineto 20 80 lineto 20 70 lineto 60 70 lineto 60 30 lineto

397: 20 30 lineto closepath

398: gsave 0.8 setgray fill grestore stroke}%

399: \special{"

400: 1.0 setlinewidth newpath 20 20 moveto 160 20 lineto stroke}%

401: \special{"

402: 1.0 setlinewidth newpath 20 80 moveto 160 80 lineto stroke}%

403: \special{"

404: 1.0 setlinewidth newpath 20 30 moveto 60 30 lineto

405: 60 70 lineto 20 70 lineto stroke}%

406: \special{"

407: 1.0 setlinewidth newpath 160 30 moveto 120 30 lineto

408: 120 70 lineto 160 70 lineto stroke}%

409: \put(15,25){\makebox(0,0)[rc]{M}}

410: \put(15,75){\makebox(0,0)[rc]{M}}

411: \put(165,25){\makebox(0,0)[lc]{M}}

412: \put(165,75){\makebox(0,0)[lc]{M}}

413: \put(90,25){\makebox(0,0)[bc]{\bm{\bar{q}}}}

414: \put(90,75){\makebox(0,0)[tc]{\bm{q}}}

415: \put(55,50){\makebox(0,0)[rc]{q}}

416: \put(125,50){\makebox(0,0)[lc]{q}}

417: \put(150,50){\makebox(0,0)[lc]{$\rightarrow$ time}}

418: \end{picture}

419: \end{center}

420: \caption[]{\small The mesons (M) exchange a quark or, equivalently,

421: a quark-antiquark pair is annihilated,

422: followed by a second quark exchange, equivalent

423: to a new quark-antiquark pair being created.}

424: \label{qexch}

425: \end{figure}

426: 

427: \noindent

428: Near a resonance, such a process may be described by scattering phase shifts

429: of the form

430: 

431: \begin{equation}

432: \xrm{cotg}\left(\delta_{\ell}(s)\right)\;\approx\;

433: \fnd{E_{R}-\sqrt{s}}{\Gamma_{R}/2}

434: \;\;\; ,

435: \label{cotgdR}

436: \end{equation}

437: 

438: \noindent

439: where $E_{R}$ and $\Gamma_{R}$ represent the central

440: invariant meson-meson mass and the resonance width, respectively.

441: 

442: However, formula (\ref{cotgdR}) is a good approximation for the

443: scattering cross section only when the resonance shape is not very much

444: distorted and the width of the resonance is small.

445: Moreover, the intermediate state in such a process is essentially

446: a constituent $q\bar{q}$ configuration that belongs to a

447: confinement spectrum (also referred to as bare or intrinsic states),

448: and hence may resonate in one of the eigenstates.

449: This implies that the colliding mesons scatter off

450: the whole $q\bar{q}$ confinement spectrum of radial, and possibly

451: also angular excitations, not just off one single state \cite{NC14p951}.

452: Consequently, a full expression for the phase shifts of

453: Eq.~(\ref{cotgdR}) should contain all possible eigenstates of such a

454: spectrum, as long as quantum numbers are respected.

455: Let us denote the eigenvalues of the relevant part of the spectrum

456: by $E_{n}$ ($n=0$, $1$, $2$, $\dots$),

457: and the corresponding eigenstates by $F_{n}$.

458: Then, following the procedure outlined in Appendices (\ref{Tmtrx}),

459: (\ref{Delta}), (\ref{Deltaell}), and in Ref.~\cite{EPJC22p493},

460: we may write for the partial-wave phase shifts the

461: more general expression

462: 

463: \begin{equation}

464: \xrm{cotg}\left(\delta (s)\right)\; =\;

465: \left[ I(s)\;\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\fnd{

466: \abs{{\cal F}_{n}}^{2}}{\sqrt{s}-E_{n}}\right]^{-1}\;

467: \left[ R(s)\;\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\fnd{

468: \abs{{\cal F}_{n}}^{2}}{\sqrt{s}-E_{n}}\; -\; 1\right]

469: \;\;\; ,

470: \label{cotgdS}

471: \end{equation}

472: which we call ``Resonance-Spectrum Expansion''. In $R(s)$ and $I(s)$ we

473: have absorbed the kinematical factors and the details of two-meson scattering,

474: and moreover the three-meson vertices.

475: 

476: For an approximate description of a specific resonance, and in

477: the rather hypothetical case that the three-meson vertices have small

478: coupling constants, one may single out, from the sum over all

479: confinement states, one particular state (say number $N$),

480: the eigenvalue of which is nearest to the

481: invariant meson-meson mass close to the resonance.

482: Then, for total invariant meson-meson masses $\sqrt{s}$ in the vicinity

483: of $E_{N}$, one finds the approximation

484: 

485: \begin{equation}

486: \xrm{cotg}\left(\delta (s)\right)\;\approx\;

487: \fnd{\left[ E_{N}\; +\; R(s)\;\abs{{\cal F}_{N}}^{2}\right]\; -\;\sqrt{s}}

488: {I(s)\;\abs{{\cal F}_{N}}^{2}}

489: \;\;\; .

490: \label{cotgdSs}

491: \end{equation}

492: 

493: \noindent

494: Formula (\ref{cotgdSs}) is indeed of the Breit-Wigner form~(\ref{cotgdR}),

495: with the central resonance position and width given by

496: 

497: \begin{equation}

498: E_{R}\;\approx\; E_{N}\; +\; R(s)\;\abs{{\cal F}_{N}}^{2}

499: \;\;\;\;\;\xrm{and}\;\;\;\;\;

500: \Gamma_{R}\;\approx\; 2I(s)\;\abs{{\cal F}_{N}}^{2}

501: \;\;\; .

502: \label{ERGR}

503: \end{equation}

504: 

505: \noindent

506: In experiment, one observes the influence of the nearest bound state of

507: the confinement spectrum, as in classical resonating systems.

508: Nevertheless, Eq.~(\ref{cotgdSs}) is only a good approximation

509: if the three-meson couplings are small.

510: Since the coupling of the meson-meson system to quark exchange

511: is strong, the influence of the higher- and lower-lying excitations is

512: not negligible.

513: 

514: In the other hypothetical limit, namely of very large couplings, we obtain

515: for the phase shift the expression

516: 

517: \begin{equation}

518: \xrm{cotg}\left(\delta (s)\right)\;\approx\;

519: \fnd{R(s)}{I(s)}

520: \;\;\; ,

521: \label{cotgdSl}

522: \end{equation}

523: 

524: \noindent

525: which describes scattering off an infinitely hard cavity.

526: 

527: The physical values of the couplings come out somewhere in between

528: the two limiting cases.

529: Most resonances and bound states can be classified as stemming from a

530: specific confinement state \cite{PLB413p137,HEPPH0204328}.

531: However, some structures in the scattering cross section stem from the

532: cavity which is formed by quark exchange or pair creation

533: \cite{EPJC22p493}.

534: The most notable of such states are the low-lying resonances

535: observed in $S$-wave pseudoscalar-pseudoscalar scattering

536: \cite{HEPEX0204018,HEPPH0110156}.

537: 

538: From the discussion above one may conclude

539: that, to lowest order, the mass of a meson follows from

540: the quark-antiquark confinement spectrum.

541: It is, however, well-known that higher-order contributions

542: to the meson propagator, in particular those from meson loops

543: as depicted in Fig.~\ref{bubble},

544: cannot be neglected.

545: 

546: \begin{figure}[ht]

547: \begin{center}

548: \begin{picture}(206,100)(-6,0)

549: \special{"

550: 0.5 setlinewidth

551: newpath -6 0 moveto

552: -6 100 lineto 200 100 lineto 200 0 lineto

553: closepath stroke}%

554: \special{"

555: 1.0 setlinewidth newpath 20 60 moveto 65.36 60 lineto stroke}%

556: \special{"

557: 1.0 setlinewidth newpath 134.64 60 moveto 180 60 lineto stroke}%

558: \special{"

559: newpath 134.64 60 moveto 100 40 40 30 150 arc stroke}%

560: \special{"

561: newpath 65.36 60 moveto 100 80 40 210 330 arc stroke}%

562: \put(15,60){\makebox(0,0)[rc]{M}}

563: \put(185,60){\makebox(0,0)[lc]{M}}

564: \put(100,35){\makebox(0,0)[lt]{meson loop}}

565: \end{picture}

566: \end{center}

567: %\caption[]{\small The lowest order self-energy graph for a meson propagator.}

568: \caption[]{\small The lowest-order self-energy graph for a meson propagator.}

569: \label{bubble}

570: \end{figure}

571: 

572: Virtual meson loops give a correction to the meson mass, whereas decay

573: channels contribute to the strong width of the meson, too.

574: One obtains for the propagator of a meson the form

575: 

576: \begin{equation}

577: \Pi(s)\;= \;\fnd{1}

578: {s\; -\;\left( M_\xrm{confinement}\; +\;\sum\;\Delta M_\xrm{meson loops}

579: \right)^{2}}

580: \;\;\; ,

581: \label{propag}

582: \end{equation}

583: 

584: \noindent

585: where $\Delta M$ develops complex values whenever the threshold of a decay

586: channel gets surpassed.

587: 

588: For the full mass of a meson, all possible meson-meson loops have to be

589: considered.

590: A model for meson-meson scattering must therefore include all

591: possible inelastic channels as well.

592: Although in principle this could be done, in practice it is not manageable,

593: unless a scheme exists dealing with all vertices and their relative

594: intensities (see e.g.\ Ref.~\cite{PRD60p034002} for scalar and

595: pseudo-scalar meson couplings).

596: In Refs.~\cite{ZPC21p291,EPJC11p717}

597: relative couplings have been determined in the

598: harmonic-oscillator approximation assuming $^{3}P_{0}$ quark exchange.

599: However, further kinematical factors must be worked out and included.

600: 

601: \section{The spectrum}

602: 

603: The full model consists of an expression for the $K$ matrix

604: similar to Eq.~(\ref{cotgdS}),

605: but extended to many meson-meson scattering channels,

606: several constituent quark-antiquark channels, and more

607: complicated transition potentials \cite{ZPC30p615,PRD27p1527},

608: which at the same time

609: and with the same set of four parameters reproduces bound states,

610: partial-wave scattering quantities, and the electromagnetic

611: transitions of $c\bar{c}$ and $b\bar{b}$ systems \cite{PRD44p2803}.

612: 

613: The $K$ matrix can be analytically continued below the various

614: thresholds, even the lowest one,

615: with no need to redefine any of the functions involved,

616: in order to study the singularities of the corresponding scattering matrix.

617: Below the lowest threshold, these poles show up on the real $\sqrt{s}$

618: axis, and can be interpreted as the bound states of the coupled system, to be

619: identified with stable mesons.

620: For the light flavors one finds this way a nonet of light

621: pseudoscalars, i.e., the pion, kaon, eta, and eta$'$.

622: For the heavy flavors, the lowest-lying model poles

623: can be identified with the $D(1870)$, $D_{s}(1970)$, $\eta_{c}(1S)$,

624: $J/\psi (1S)$, $\psi (3686)$, $B(5280)$, $B_{s}(5380)$,

625: $\Upsilon (1S)$, $\Upsilon (2S)$, and $\Upsilon (3S)$.

626: 

627: Above the lowest threshold, the model's partial-wave cross sections

628: and phase shifts for all included meson-meson channels

629: can be calculated and compared to experiment, as well as the

630: inelastic transitions.

631: Singularities of the scattering matrix come out with negative imaginary

632: part in the $\sqrt{s}$ plane.

633: To say it more precisely: out of the many singularities in a rather complex

634: set of Riemann sheets, some come close enough to the physical real

635: axis to be noticed in the partial-wave phase shifts and

636: cross sections.

637: In fact, each meson-meson channel doubles the number of Riemann

638: sheets, hence the number of poles.

639: Consequently, with ten scattering channels one has for each eigenvalue of

640: the confinement spectrum 1024 poles in 1024 Riemann sheets, out

641: of which usually only one contains relevant poles in each $\sqrt{s}$

642: interval in between the thresholds.

643: Those can be identified with the known resonances,

644: like the $\rho$ pole in $\pi\pi$ scattering,

645: or the $K^{\ast}$ pole in $K\pi$ scattering.

646: However, there may always be a pole in a nearby Riemann sheet

647: just around the corner of one of the thresholds, which can be

648: noticed in the partial-wave cross section.

649: The study of such poles is an interesting subject by itself

650: \cite{PRD59p074001,NPB587p331}.

651: 

652: Once the four model parameters are adjusted to

653: the experimental phase shifts and cross sections,

654: the pole positions can be determined and compared with tables for

655: meson spectroscopy. For the purpose of the present investigation, we shall

656: focus next on the singularity structure of the $S$ matrix for the lowest-lying

657: poles in $S$-wave meson-meson scattering, employing the simplified model of

658: Sec.~3 above.

659: 

660: \section{Scattering-matrix poles}

661: \label{scatpoles}

662: 

663: In the hypothetical case of very small couplings for the three-meson

664: vertices, we obtain poles in the scattering matrix that lie close

665: to the eigenvalues of the confinement spectrum.

666: Let us denote by $M_{1}$ and $M_{2}$ the meson masses,

667: and by $\Delta E$ the difference between the complex-energy pole

668: of the scattering matrix and the energy eigenvalue $E_{N}$ of

669: the nearby state of the confinement spectrum.

670: Using formula (\ref{ERGR}), we obtain

671: 

672: \begin{equation}

673: \Delta E\;\approx\;

674: \left\{ R(s)\; -\; iI(s)\right\}\;\abs{{\cal F}_{N}}^{2}

675: \;\;\; .

676: \label{DeltaE}

677: \end{equation}

678: 

679: \noindent

680: We may distinguish two different cases:

681: \vspace{0.3cm}

682: 

683: (1) $E_{N}\;>\; M_{1}+M_{2}$ (above threshold),

684: \vspace{0.1cm}

685: 

686: (2) $E_{N}\;<\; M_{1}+M_{2}$ (below threshold).

687: \vspace{0.5cm}

688: 

689: When the nearby state of the confinement spectrum is in the

690: scattering continuum, then $\Delta E$ has a {\bf negative}

691: imaginary part and a real part, since both $R(s)$ and $I(s)$

692: of formula (\ref{DeltaE}) are real, and $I(s)$ is moreover positive.

693: The resonance singularity of the scattering matrix corresponding to

694: this situation is depicted in Fig.~\ref{Above}.

695: 

696: Notice that the resonance pole is in the lower half of the

697: complex-energy plane (second Riemann sheet), as it should be.

698: 

699: \begin{figure}[ht]

700: \begin{center}

701: \begin{picture}(400,105)(0,-50)

702: \put(  0,-50){\line(1,0){400}}

703: \put(  0, 55){\line(1,0){400}}

704: \put(  0,-50){\line(0,1){105}}

705: \put(400,-50){\line(0,1){105}}

706: \put(0,0){\line(1,0){400}}

707: \put(100,-2){\line(0,1){4}}

708: \put(100,-2){\line(1,0){300}}

709: \put(100, 2){\line(1,0){300}}

710: \put(380,5){\makebox(0,0)[bl]{\small cut}}

711: \put(100,5){\makebox(0,0)[bl]{\small threshold}}

712: \put(100,-5){\makebox(0,0)[tl]{\small $\sqrt{s}=M_{1}+M_{2}$}}

713: \put(300,0){\makebox(0,0){$\bullet$}}

714: \put(300,5){\makebox(0,0)[bc]{\small $E_{N}$}}

715: \put(300,0){\vector(-1,-4){9}}

716: \put(298,-15){\makebox(0,0)[lt]{\small $\Delta E$}}

717: \put(290,-40){\makebox(0,0){$\bullet$}}

718: \put(295,-40){\makebox(0,0)[lc]{\small resonance position}}

719: \put(5,20){\vector(0,1){20}}

720: \put(5,43){\makebox(0,0)[cl]{\small $\Imag{\sqrt{s}}$}}

721: \put(5,20){\vector(1,0){10}}

722: \put(18,20){\makebox(0,0)[cl]{\small $\Real{\sqrt{s}}$}}

723: \end{picture}

724: \end{center}

725: \caption[]{\small When the confinement state on the real $\sqrt{s}$ axis is in

726: the scattering continuum, then for small coupling (perturbative regime)

727: the resonance pole moves into the lower half of the complex $\sqrt{s}$ plane.}

728: \label{Above}

729: \end{figure}

730: 

731: When the nearby state of the confinement spectrum is below

732: the scattering threshold, then $\Delta E$ has only a real part,

733: since $I(s)$ turns purely imaginary below threshold, whereas

734: $R(s)$ remains real.

735: The bound-state singularity of the scattering matrix corresponding to

736: this situation is depicted in Fig.~\ref{Below}.

737: 

738: Note that the bound-state pole is on the real axis of

739: the complex-energy plane, as it should be.

740: 

741: \begin{figure}[ht]

742: \begin{center}

743: \begin{picture}(400,75)(0,-20)

744: \put(  0,-20){\line(1,0){400}}

745: \put(  0, 55){\line(1,0){400}}

746: \put(  0,-20){\line(0,1){75}}

747: \put(400,-20){\line(0,1){75}}

748: \put(0,0){\line(1,0){400}}

749: \put(300,-2){\line(0,1){4}}

750: \put(300,-2){\line(1,0){100}}

751: \put(300, 2){\line(1,0){100}}

752: \put(380,5){\makebox(0,0)[bl]{\small cut}}

753: \put(300,5){\makebox(0,0)[bl]{\small threshold}}

754: \put(300,-5){\makebox(0,0)[tl]{\small $\sqrt{s}=M_{1}+M_{2}$}}

755: \put(250,0){\makebox(0,0){$\bullet$}}

756: \put(250,5){\makebox(0,0)[bc]{\small $E_{N}$}}

757: \put(250,-1){\vector(-1,0){97}}

758: \put(200,-5){\makebox(0,0)[tc]{\small $\Delta E$}}

759: \put(150,0){\makebox(0,0){$\bullet$}}

760: \put(190,5){\makebox(0,0)[rb]{\small bound state position}}

761: \put(5,20){\vector(0,1){20}}

762: \put(5,43){\makebox(0,0)[cl]{\small $\Imag{\sqrt{s}}$}}

763: \put(5,20){\vector(1,0){10}}

764: \put(18,20){\makebox(0,0)[cl]{\small $\Real{\sqrt{s}}$}}

765: \end{picture}

766: \end{center}

767: \caption[]{\small When the confinement state on the real $\sqrt{s}$ axis is

768: below the lowest scattering threshold, then the bound-state singularity

769: comes out on the real $\sqrt{s}$ axis.}

770: \label{Below}

771: \end{figure}

772: 

773: \section{Threshold behavior}

774: 

775: Near the lowest threshold, as a function of the overall coupling

776: constant, $S$-wave poles behave very differently

777: from $P$- and higher-wave poles.

778: This can easily be understood from the effective-range expansion

779: \cite{PotentialScattering} at the pole position.

780: There, the cotangent of the phase shift equals $i$.

781: Hence, for $S$ waves the next-to-lowest-order term in the expansion

782: equals $ik$ ($k$ represents the linear momentum related to $s$

783: and to the lowest threshold).

784: For higher waves, on the other hand, the next-to-lowest-order term in the

785: effective-range expansion is proportional to $k^{2}$.

786: 

787: Poles for $P$ and higher waves behave in the complex $k$ plane

788: as indicated in Fig.~\ref{SPDpoles}$b$.

789: The two $k$-plane poles meet at threshold ($k=0$).

790: When the coupling constant of the model is increased, the poles

791: move along the imaginary $k$ axis.

792: One pole moves towards negative imaginary $k$, corresponding to

793: a virtual bound state below threshold on the real $\sqrt{s}$ axis,

794: but in the wrong Riemann sheet.

795: The other pole moves towards positive imaginary $k$,

796: corresponding to a real bound state.

797: 

798: \begin{figure}[ht]

799: \begin{center}

800: \begin{picture}(320,160)(0,-10)

801: \special{"

802: 0.5 setlinewidth

803: newpath 0 0 moveto

804: 0 150 lineto 150 150 lineto 150 0 lineto

805: closepath stroke}%

806: \special{"

807: 0.5 setlinewidth

808: newpath 170 0 moveto

809: 170 150 lineto 320 150 lineto 320 0 lineto

810: closepath stroke}%

811: \special{"

812: 0.3 setlinewidth newpath 5 90 moveto 145 90 lineto stroke}%

813: \special{"

814: 0.3 setlinewidth newpath 75 5 moveto 75 145 lineto stroke}%

815: \special{"

816: 1.5 setlinewidth newpath 75 70 moveto 75 -130 200 90 105 arc stroke}%

817: \special{"

818: 1.5 setlinewidth newpath 75 70 moveto -1 1 scale

819: -75 -130 200 90 105 arc stroke}%

820: \special{"

821: 1.5 setlinewidth newpath 75 20 moveto 75 125 lineto stroke}%

822: \put(145,95){\makebox(0,0)[rb]{\small Re($k$)}}

823: \put(80,145){\makebox(0,0)[lt]{\small Im($k$)}}

824: \put(31,69){\vector(4,1){10}}

825: \put(119,69){\vector(-4,1){10}}

826: \put(69,102){\vector(0,1){10}}

827: \put(69,43){\vector(0,-1){10}}

828: \put(64,36){\makebox(0,0)[rt]{\scriptsize virtual}}

829: \put(64,27){\makebox(0,0)[rt]{\scriptsize bound}}

830: \put(64,18){\makebox(0,0)[rt]{\scriptsize state}}

831: \put(64,123){\makebox(0,0)[rt]{\scriptsize bound}}

832: \put(64,114){\makebox(0,0)[rt]{\scriptsize state}}

833: \put(120,60){\makebox(0,0)[ct]{\scriptsize resonance}}

834: \put(120,54){\makebox(0,0)[ct]{\scriptsize pole}}

835: \put(75,-4){\makebox(0,0)[ct]{$(a)$}}

836: \put(145,5){\makebox(0,0)[rb]{\small\bf \bm{S} wave}}

837: \special{"

838: 0.3 setlinewidth newpath 175 75 moveto 315 75 lineto stroke}%

839: \special{"

840: 0.3 setlinewidth newpath 245 5 moveto 245 145 lineto stroke}%

841: \special{"

842: 1.5 setlinewidth newpath 245 75 moveto 245 -125 200 90 105 arc stroke}%

843: \special{"

844: 1.5 setlinewidth newpath 245 75 moveto -1 1 scale

845: -245 -125 200 90 105 arc stroke}%

846: \special{"

847: 1.5 setlinewidth newpath 245 20 moveto 245 125 lineto stroke}%

848: \put(315,80){\makebox(0,0)[rb]{\small Re($k$)}}

849: \put(250,145){\makebox(0,0)[lt]{\small Im($k$)}}

850: \put(201,64){\vector(4,1){10}}

851: \put(289,64){\vector(-4,1){10}}

852: \put(239,102){\vector(0,1){10}}

853: \put(239,43){\vector(0,-1){10}}

854: \put(234,36){\makebox(0,0)[rt]{\scriptsize virtual}}

855: \put(234,27){\makebox(0,0)[rt]{\scriptsize bound}}

856: \put(234,18){\makebox(0,0)[rt]{\scriptsize state}}

857: \put(234,123){\makebox(0,0)[rt]{\scriptsize bound}}

858: \put(234,114){\makebox(0,0)[rt]{\scriptsize state}}

859: \put(290,60){\makebox(0,0)[ct]{\scriptsize resonance}}

860: \put(290,54){\makebox(0,0)[ct]{\scriptsize pole}}

861: \put(245,-4){\makebox(0,0)[ct]{$(b)$}}

862: \put(315,5){\makebox(0,0)[rb]{\small\bf \bm{P} wave}}

863: \end{picture}

864: \end{center}

865: \caption[]{\small Variation of the positions of scattering-matrix poles

866: as a function of hypothetical variations in the three-meson-vertex coupling,

867: for $S$ waves ($a$), and for $P$ and higher waves ($b$).

868: The arrows indicate increasing coupling constant.}

869: \label{SPDpoles}

870: \end{figure}

871: 

872: For $S$-wave poles, the behavior is shown in Fig.~\ref{SPDpoles}$a$.

873: The two $k$-plane poles meet on the negative imaginary $k$ axis.

874: When the coupling constant of the model is slightly increased,

875: both poles continue on the negative imaginary $k$ axis,

876: corresponding to two virtual bound states below threshold on the real

877: $\sqrt{s}$ axis.

878: Upon further increasing the coupling constant of the model,

879: one pole moves towards increasing negative imaginary $k$, thereby

880: remaining a virtual bound state for all values of the coupling constant.

881: The other pole moves towards positive imaginary $k$,

882: eventually passing threshold ($k=0$), thereby turning into a real

883: bound state of the system of coupled meson-meson scattering channels.

884: Hence, for a small range of hypothetical values of the coupling constant,

885: there are two virtual bound states, one of which is very close to

886: threshold.

887: Such a pole certainly has noticeable influence on the scattering cross section.

888: 

889: Although we are not aware of any experimental data that could

890: confirm the above-described threshold behavior of poles,

891: we suspect this to be possible for atomic transitions in cavities.

892: Unfortunately, it does not seem likely that in the near future

893: similar processes can be studied for strong coupling.

894: 

895: \section{The low-lying nonet of \bm{S}-wave poles}

896: 

897: The nonet of low-lying $S$-wave poles behave as described

898: in Sec.~(\ref{scatpoles}), with respect to variations of the

899: model's overall coupling constant.

900: However, they do not stem from the confinement spectrum,

901: but rather from the cavity.

902: For small values of the coupling, such poles disappear into the

903: continuum, i.e., they move towards negative imaginary infinity

904: \cite{EPJC22p493},

905: and not towards an eigenstate of the confinement spectrum as in

906: Fig.~\ref{Above}.

907: 

908: \begin{figure}[ht]

909: \centerline{\scalebox{0.7}{\includegraphics{kappapole.ps}}}

910: \caption[]{\small Hypothetical movement of the $K_{0}^{\ast}(800)$ pole in

911: $K\pi$ ($I=1/2$) $S$-wave scattering as a function of the coupling constant

912: $\lambda$ ($\lambda$ is increased by steps of 0.01 unit, starting from 0.9).

913: The two branches on the imaginary $k$ axis (see Fig.~\ref{SPDpoles})

914: both result in poles on the real axis in the $E=\sqrt{s}$ plane.

915: However, in order to visualize their movement as a function of the

916: coupling constant, we give virtual bound states ($Im(k)<0$) a small

917: negative and bound states ($Im(k)>0$) a small positive imaginary part.

918: In the inset we show in more detail how the poles coming from the

919: lower half of the complex $E=\sqrt{s}$ plane end up on the real axis when

920: the coupling constant is increased from 1.2 to 1.25.

921: }

922: \label{kappapole}

923: \end{figure}

924: 

925: In Fig.~\ref{kappapole} we study the hypothetical

926: movement of the $K_{0}^{\ast}(800)$ pole in $K\pi$

927: $S$-wave scattering.

928: The physical value of the coupling constant equals 0.75,

929: which is not shown in Fig.~\ref{kappapole}.

930: A figure for smaller values of the coupling constants can be

931: found in Ref.~\cite{EPJC22p493}.

932: The physical pole in $K\pi$ isodoublet $S$-wave scattering,

933: related to experiment \cite{HEPEX0204018},

934: comes out at $727-i263$ MeV in Ref.~\cite{ZPC30p615}.

935: Here we concentrate on the threshold behavior of the

936: hypothetical pole movements in the complex $k$ and $\sqrt{s}$

937: planes as a function of the coupling constant.

938: Until they meet on the axis, which is for a value of the

939: coupling constant slightly larger than 1.24, we have only

940: depicted the right-hand branch.

941: 

942: The pole corresponding to the one moving downwards

943: along the imaginary $k$ axis moves to the left on the real

944: $\sqrt{s}$ axis.

945: The pole which moves upwards along the imaginary $k$ axis

946: initially moves towards threshold and then turns back,

947: following the former pole, but in a different Riemann sheet.

948: In the inset we clarify the motion of the $S$-matrix singularities

949: just before and just after they represent virtual and real bound states.

950: Notice that, since we took 0.14 GeV and 0.50 GeV for

951: the pion and the kaon mass, respectively, we end up

952: with a threshold at 0.64 GeV.

953: 

954: It is interesting to note that in a recent work by Boglione and

955: Pennington \cite{HEPPH0203149} a zero-width state is found

956: below the $K\pi$ threshold in $S$-wave scattering, instead of the

957: $K_0^*(800)$ resonance. Here, we would obtain such a state for \em unphysical

958: \em \/values of the coupling.

959: 

960: In Fig.~\ref{a0pole} we have depicted the movement of the

961: $a_ {0}(980)$ pole in $S$ wave $I=1$ $K\bar{K}$ scattering

962: (threshold at 1.0 GeV) on the upwards-going branch.

963: One observes a very similar behavior as in the case of $K\pi$

964: scattering, but with two important differences, to be described next.

965: 

966: \begin{figure}[htbp]

967: \centerline{\scalebox{0.7}{\includegraphics{a0pole.ps}}}

968: \caption[]{\small Pole movement of the $a_0(980)$ as a function of the coupling

969: constant $\lambda$ for $K\bar{K}$ ($I=1$) $S$-wave scattering

970: ($\lambda$ is increased by steps of 0.01 unit, starting from 0.02).

971: As in the case of the $K_{0}^{\ast}(800)$ pole,

972: the two branches on the imaginary $k$ axis (see Fig.~\ref{SPDpoles})

973: both result in poles on the real axis in the $E=\sqrt{s}$ plane.

974: However, in this case we only study the upwards moving branch.

975: Also here, in order to visualize their movement as a function of the

976: coupling constant, we give virtual bound states ($Im(k)<0$) a small

977: negative and bound states ($Im(k)>0$) a small positive imaginary part.

978: In the inset we show in more detail how the poles coming from the

979: lower half of the complex $E=\sqrt{s}$ plane end up on the real axis when

980: the coupling constant is increased from 0.50 to 0.51.

981: }

982: \label{a0pole}

983: \end{figure}

984: 

985: The $K_{0}^{\ast}(800)$ poles meet on the real $\sqrt{s}$ axis

986: only 16 MeV below threshold (see Fig.~\ref{kappapole}),

987: and for a value of the coupling constant which is well above

988: the physical value of 0.75, whereas the $a_ {0}(980)$ poles meet

989: 238 MeV below threshold, when the coupling constant

990: only equals slightly more than 0.5.

991: At the physical value of the coupling constant, the $a_ {0}(980)$

992: pole is a real bound state some 9 MeV below threshold.

993: 

994: But there is yet another difference.

995: Whereas the $K\pi$ channel represents the lowest possible scattering

996: threshold for the $K_{0}^{\ast}(800)$ system,

997: $K\bar{K}$ is not the lowest channel for the $a_ {0}(980)$.

998: In a more complete description, at least all pseudoscalar

999: meson-meson channels should be taken into account.

1000: One of these is the $\eta\pi$ channel, which has a threshold

1001: well below $K\bar{K}$.

1002: Consequently, upon including the $\eta\pi$ channel in the model, the pole

1003: cannot remain on the real $\sqrt{s}$ axis, but has to acquire

1004: an imaginary part in a similar way as shown in

1005: Fig.~\ref{Above}.

1006: In Ref.~\cite{ZPC30p615} we obtained a resonance-like structure

1007: in the $\eta\pi$ cross section, representing the physical

1008: $a_{0}(980)$. The corresponding pole came out at $962-i28$ MeV.

1009: 

1010: For the $f_{0}(980)$ system the situation is very similar

1011: to that of the $a_ {0}(980)$.

1012: Assuming a pure $s\bar{s}$ quark content \cite{PLB521p15}, we obtain for the

1013: variation of the corresponding pole in $K\bar{K}$ ($I=0$) $S$-wave scattering

1014: a picture almost equal to the one shown in Fig.~\ref{a0pole}.

1015: However, only in lowest order the $K\bar{K}$ channel can be considered

1016: the lowest threshold for the $f_{0}(980)$ system.

1017: In reality, $s\bar{s}$ also couples to the nonstrange quark-antiquark

1018: isosinglet, namely via the $K\bar{K}$ channel, and hence to $\pi\pi$

1019: \cite{NPB266p451}. Nevertheless, this higher-order coupling turns out to be

1020: rather weak, which implies that the resulting pole does not move far away from

1021: the $K\bar{K}$ bound state.

1022: In Ref.~\cite{ZPC30p615} we obtained a resonance-like structure

1023: in the $\pi\pi$ cross section representing the physical

1024: $f_ {0}(980)$.

1025: The corresponding pole came out at $994-i20$ MeV.

1026: 

1027: At lower energies, we found for the same cross section a pole

1028: which is the equivalent of the $K_{0}^{\ast}(800)$ system, but now

1029: in $\pi\pi$ isoscalar $S$-wave scattering.

1030: This pole at $470-i208$ MeV can be associated with the

1031: $\sigma$ or $f_0(600)$ meson, since it has the same quantum numbers

1032: and lies in the ballpark of predicted pole positions

1033: in  models for the $\sigma$ (a complete overview of $\sigma$ poles can be

1034: found in Ref.~\cite{HEPPH0201006}).

1035: 

1036: We do not find any other relevant poles in the energy region

1037: up to 1.0 GeV.

1038: 

1039: \section{Summary and conclusions}

1040: 

1041: It should be clear from the foregoing that the light scalar mesons \em do \em

1042: \/allow a description on the basis of normal $q\bar{q}$ states, provided one

1043: accounts for mesonic loops. The crucial point is that, while for the other

1044: mesons the effect of coupling to open and closed meson-meson channels is more

1045: or less perturbative, giving rise to complex or real mass shifts of the

1046: $q\bar{q}$ confinement states, in the case of the scalar mesons the very strong

1047: $^3P_0$ coupling to $S$-wave pseudoscalar-pseudoscalar channels forces

1048: additional, highly non-perturbative poles in the $S$ matrix to approach the

1049: physical region, unhampered by any centrifugal barrier in the two-meson sector.

1050: In other words, these singularities do not stem from the

1051: confinement spectrum, at least not in a simple way, but are rather due to the

1052: $^3P_0$ barrier providing the communication between the $q\bar{q}$ states

1053: and the meson-meson continuum. Nonetheless, these poles give rise to very

1054: pronounced structures in the $S$-wave scattering of pseudoscalar mesons, which

1055: can be either clear-cut resonances ($a_{0}(980)$ and $f_{0}(980)$), or broad

1056: non-resonant bumps ($f_0(600)$ and $K_0^*(800)$).

1057: 

1058: These conclusions we were able to make more quantitative by employing a

1059: simplified two-channel model with a delta-shell transition potential, allowing

1060: the derivation of a general, closed-form expression of the scattering phase

1061: shift for an \em arbitrary \em \/confinement mechanism. This formula, which we

1062: baptized ``Resonance-Spectrum Expansion'', turns into a standard

1063: Breit-Wigner form in the vicinity of a particular resonance, in the limit of

1064: small coupling and width, whereas it describes hard-sphere scattering in the

1065: limit of large coupling. Application of this formalism to the specific case

1066: of the scalar mesons unmistakably shows that \em all \em \/states of

1067: the light nonet have the same origin, and, in principle, the same threshold

1068: behavior. It just happens that the various thresholds of the different scalars

1069: are very disparate, not in the least due to the small pion mass and hence to

1070: chiral symmetry.

1071: 

1072: In particular, we found, in the complex-energy plane, a nonet of $S$-matrix

1073: poles representing the $a_{0}(980)$, $f_{0}(980)$, $f_0(600)$, and

1074: $K_0^*(800)$, the latter two having real parts of 0.47 GeV and 0.73 GeV,

1075: respectively, and imaginary parts of 0.21 GeV resp.\ 0.26 GeV.

1076: Whether or not these poles manifest themselves as clear physical resonances

1077: \cite{NPA688p823} is not so relevant here in view of their common nature, as

1078: we have demonstrated in detail for the $K_0^*(800)$ and $a_0(980)$. Besides

1079: these ``non-perturbative'' states, we also found the confinement-ground-state

1080: nonet of scalar mesons $f_{0}(1370)$, $a_{0}(1450)$, $K_{0}^{\ast}(1430)$, and

1081: $f_{0}(1500)$. The latter poles vary as a function of the coupling constant

1082: exactly the way indicated in Fig.~\ref{Above}. For vanishing coupling,

1083: they end up on the real energy axis at the positions of the various

1084: ground-state eigenvalues of the confinement spectrum, which are the

1085: light-flavor $^{3}P_{0}$ states at 1.3 to 1.5 GeV

1086: \cite{PRD61p014015,HEPLAT9805029,NPPS53p236}. Recall that, in contrast, the

1087: poles of the light scalars move towards negative imaginary infinity in this

1088: limit.

1089: 

1090: In conclusion, we should mention that a coupled-channel or unitarized

1091: approach to the scalar mesons, similar in spirit to our present and previous

1092: \cite{ZPC30p615,EPJC10p469} works, is rapidly gaining advocates

1093: \cite{ZPC68p647,PRL76p1575,PLB462p14,HEPPH0204205}.

1094: Nevertheless, in none of these works a simultaneous discription of the two

1095: lowest scalar nonets is achieved as outlined above, most notably the still

1096: widely contested \cite{ZPC68p647,PRL76p1575,NPA688p823} but now experimentally

1097: confirmed $K_0^*(800)$. As a final remark, let us point out that in our full

1098: model with many coupled channels \cite{ZPC30p615}, all channels contribute to

1099: the states under the resonance, and not just one specific channel. However,

1100: both the full and the simplified model produce very similar masses and widths

1101: for the light scalars when reproducing the experimental phase shifts in the

1102: relevant energy region. This lends additional quantitative support to our

1103: predictions for these observables presented here.

1104: \vspace{0.3cm}

1105: 

1106: {\bf Acknowledgement}:

1107: We wish to thank F.~Kleefeld for useful discussions on the distribution

1108: of $S$-matrix poles in the complex $E$ and $k$ planes.

1109: 

1110: This work was partly supported by the

1111: {\it Fun\-da\-\c{c}\~{a}o para a Ci\^{e}ncia e a Tecnologia}

1112: \/of the {\it Minist\'{e}rio da

1113: Ci\^{e}ncia e da Tecnologia} \/of Portugal,

1114: under contract numbers

1115: CERN/\-FIS/\-43697/\-2001

1116: and

1117: CERN/\-FNU/\-49555/\-2002.

1118: 

1119: \appendix

1120: 

1121: \section{The \bm{T} matrix for meson-meson scattering}

1122: \label{Tmtrx}

1123: 

1124: In Eq.~(\ref{cpldeqn}), we must eliminate $\psi_{c}$, since it vanishes at

1125: large distances and is thus {\it unobservable}. Formally, this can be done

1126: in a straightforward way. We then obtain the relation

1127: 

1128: \begin{equation}

1129: \psi_{f}\left(\vec{r}\;\right)\; =\;

1130: \left( E-H_{f}\right)^{-1}\;\left[ V_{t}\right]^{T}\;

1131: \left( E-H_{c}\right)^{-1}\; V_{t}\;\psi_{f}\left(\vec{r}\;\right)

1132: \;\;\; .

1133: \label{scatteqn}

1134: \end{equation}

1135: 

1136: By comparison of Eq.~(\ref{scatteqn}) with the usual expressions for

1137: the scattering wave equations, we conclude that the generalized

1138: potential $V$ is here given by

1139: 

1140: \begin{equation}

1141: V\; =\;\left[ V_{t}\right]^{T}\;\left( E-H_{c}\right)^{-1}\; V_{t}

1142: \;\;\; .

1143: \label{generalpot}

1144: \end{equation}

1145: 

1146: The matrix elements of the $T$-operator are defined

1147: by the Lippmann-Schwinger equation

1148: 

1149: \begin{eqnarray}

1150: \lefteqn{T\left({\vec{p}\;},{{\vec{p}\,}'\;}; z\right)\; =\;

1151: V\left({\vec{p}\;},{\vec{p}\,}'\right)\; +}

1152: \nonumber \\ [.3cm] & + &

1153: \int d^{3}k'\;\int d^{3}k\;

1154: V\left({\vec{p}\;},{{\vec{k}\,}'\;}\right)\;

1155: G_{f}\left({{\vec{k}\,}'\;},{\vec{k}\;}; z\right)\;

1156: V\left({\vec{k}\;},{\vec{p}\,}'\right)\; +

1157: \nonumber \\ [.3cm] & + &

1158: \int d^{3}k'''\;\int d^{3}k''\;\int d^{3}k'\;\int d^{3}k\;

1159: V\left({\vec{p}\;},{{\vec{k}\,}'''\;}\right)\;

1160: G_{f}\left({{\vec{k}\,}'''\;},{{\vec{k}\,}''\;}; z\right)\;

1161: V\left({{\vec{k}\,}''\;},{\vec{k}\,}'\right)\;\times

1162: \nonumber \\ [.3cm] & & \;\;\;\times\;

1163: G_{f}\left({{\vec{k}\,}'\;},{\vec{k}\;}; z\right)\;

1164: V\left({\vec{k}\;},{\vec{p}\,}'\right)\; +\;

1165: \dots

1166: \;\;\; ,

1167: \label{Titeration}

1168: \end{eqnarray}

1169: 

1170: \noindent

1171: where the Green's operator $G_{f}(z)$ corresponds to the self-adjoint free

1172: Hamiltonian $H_{f}$, according to

1173: 

1174: \begin{equation}

1175: G_{f}\left({{\vec{k}\,}'\;},{\vec{k}\;}; z\right)\; =\;

1176: \braket{{{\vec{k}\,}'\;}}{\left( z-H_{f}\right)^{-1}}{\vec{k}\;}\; =\;

1177: \fnd{2\mu_{f}}{2\mu_{f} z-{k'}^{2}}\bracket{{{\vec{k}\,}'\;}}{\vec{k}\;}

1178: \;\;\; .

1179: \label{Greensfu}

1180: \end{equation}

1181: 

1182: \noindent

1183: Substitution of relation (\ref{Greensfu}) in expression

1184: (\ref{Titeration}) yields for the $T$-matrix elements the form

1185: 

1186: \begin{eqnarray}

1187: \lefteqn{T\left({\vec{p}\;},{{\vec{p}\,}'\;}; z\right)\; =\;

1188: V\left({\vec{p}\;},{\vec{p}\,}'\right)\; +\;

1189: \int d^{3}k\; V\left({\vec{p}\;},{\vec{k}\;}\right)\;

1190: \fnd{2\mu_{f}}{2\mu_{f} z-k^{2}}\;

1191: V\left({{\vec{k}\;}},{\vec{p}\,}'\right)\; +}

1192: \label{Titeration1} \\ [.3cm] & + &

1193: \int d^{3}k'\;\int d^{3}k\;

1194: V\left({\vec{p}\;},{{\vec{k}\,}'\;}\right)\;

1195: \fnd{2\mu_{f}}{2\mu_{f} z-{k'}^{2}}\;

1196: V\left({{\vec{k}\,}'\;},{\vec{k}\,}\right)\;

1197: \fnd{2\mu_{f}}{2\mu_{f} z-k^{2}}\;

1198: V\left({\vec{k}\;},{\vec{p}\,}'\right)\; +\;

1199: \dots

1200: \;\;\; .

1201: \nonumber

1202: \end{eqnarray}

1203: 

1204: At this stage, we must make a choice for the operators $H_{c}$, describing

1205: the confinement dynamics in the interaction region, $H_{f}$, representing the

1206: dynamics of the scattered particles at large distances, and $V_{t}$, which

1207: stands for the transitions between these two sectors. For an arbitrary

1208: spherically symmetric confinement potential $V_{c}$, we define these operators

1209: in configuration space by

1210: 

1211: \begin{displaymath}

1212: H_{c}\; =\; -\fnd{\nabla^{2}_{r}}{2\mu_{c}}\; +\; m_{q}\; +\; m_{\bar{q}}\;

1213: +\; V_{c}(r)

1214: \;\;\;\;\; ,\;\;\;\;\;

1215: H_{f}\; =\; -\fnd{\nabla^{2}_{r}}{2\mu_{f}}\; +\; M_{1}\; +\; M_{2}

1216: \end{displaymath}

1217: 

1218: \begin{equation}

1219: \xrm{and}\;\;\;\;\;

1220: V_{t}\; =\; \fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}\;\delta\left( r-a\right)

1221: \;\;\; .

1222: \label{Opmodel}

1223: \end{equation}

1224: 

1225: \noindent

1226: The various mass parameters of Eq.~(\ref{Opmodel}) are defined in

1227: Table~\ref{masses}.

1228: The transition potential $V_{t}$, which provides the communication between

1229: the confined channel and the scattering channel,

1230: is an extreme simplification of potentials \cite{ZPC21p291} that may describe

1231: the breaking of the color string.

1232: Here it is assumed to only act when the particles are at a distance $r=a$,

1233: thus having the form of a sperical delta shell.

1234: 

1235: \begin{table}[ht]

1236: \begin{center}

1237: \begin{tabular}{|c||l|}

1238: \hline\hline & \\ [-0.3cm]

1239: symbol & definition \\

1240: \hline & \\ [-0.3cm]

1241: $m_{q}$ $\left( m_{\bar{q}}\right)$ & constituent (anti-)quark mass \\

1242: $\mu_{c}$ & reduced mass in confinement channel \\

1243: $M_{1,2}$ & meson masses \\

1244: $\mu_{f}$ & reduced mass in scattering channel \\

1245: \hline\hline

1246: \end{tabular}

1247: \end{center}

1248: \caption[]{\small Definition of mass parameters used in Eq.~(\ref{Opmodel}).}

1249: \label{masses}

1250: \end{table}

1251: 

1252: In configuration space, we may then write the non-relativistic $2\times 2$

1253: stationary matrix wave equation (\ref{cpldeqn}) in the form

1254: 

1255: \begin{eqnarray}

1256: \left( -\fnd{\nabla^{2}_{r}}{2\mu_{c}}\; +\; m_{q}\; +\; m_{\bar{q}}\;

1257: +\; V_{c}\; -\; E\right)

1258: \;\psi_{c}\left(\vec{r}\;\right) & = &

1259: -\fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}\;

1260: \delta\left( r-a\right)\;\psi_{f}\left(\vec{r}\;\right)

1261: \;\;\; ,\nonumber \\ [.3cm]

1262: \left( -\fnd{\nabla^{2}_{r}}{2\mu_{f}}\; +\; M_{1}\; +\; M_{2}\; -E\right)

1263: \;\psi_{f}\left(\vec{r}\;\right) & = &

1264: -\fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}\;

1265: \delta\left( r-a\right)\;\psi_{c}\left(\vec{r}\;\right)

1266: \;\;\; .

1267: \label{c2x2weqCS}

1268: \end{eqnarray}

1269: 

1270: \subsection{The Born term}

1271: 

1272: In the momentum representation, Eq.~(\ref{generalpot}) takes the form

1273: 

1274: \begin{equation}

1275: V\left({\vec{p}\;},{\vec{p}\,}'\right)\; =\;

1276: \bra{\vec{p}\,}\; V\;\ket{{\vec{p}\,}'}\; =\;

1277: \bra{\vec{p}\,}\;\left[ V_{t}\right]^{T}\;

1278: \left( E(p)-H_{c}\right)^{-1}\; V_{t}\;

1279: \ket{{\vec{p}\,}'}

1280: \;\;\; .

1281: \label{MSgeneralpot}

1282: \end{equation}

1283: 

1284: \noindent

1285: The total center-of-mass energy $E$ and the linear momentum $p$ are, through

1286: Eq.~(\ref{Opmodel}), related by

1287: 

1288: \begin{equation}

1289: E(p)\; =\;

1290: \fnd{{\vec{p}\;}^{2}}{2\mu_{f}}\; +\; M_{1}\; +\; M_{2}

1291: \;\;\; .

1292: \label{Ep}

1293: \end{equation}

1294: 

1295: \noindent

1296: We denote the properly normalized eigensolutions of the operator $H_{c}$

1297: (\ref{Opmodel}), corresponding to the energy eigenvalue $E_{n\ell}$, by

1298: 

1299: \begin{equation}

1300: \bracket{\vec{r}\,}{n\ell m}\; =\;

1301: Y^{(\ell)}_{m}\left(\hat{r}\right)\;

1302: {\cal F}_{n\ell}(r)

1303: \;\;\; ,\;\;\;

1304: \xrm{with $n=0$, $1$, $2$, $\dots$; $\ell =0$, $1$, $2$, $\dots$;

1305: $m=-\ell$, $\dots$, $+\ell$}

1306: \; .

1307: \label{Vccomplete}

1308: \end{equation}

1309: 

1310: \noindent

1311: So, by letting the self-adjoint operator $H_{c}$ act to the left in

1312: Eq.~(\ref{MSgeneralpot}), we write

1313: 

1314: \begin{eqnarray}

1315: \bra{\vec{p}\,}\; V\;\ket{{\vec{p}\,}'} & = &

1316: \sum_{n\ell  m}\;\bra{\vec{p}\,}\;

1317: \left[ V_{t}\right]^{T}\;

1318: \ket{n\ell  m}\;\bra{n\ell  m}\;\left( E(p)-H_{c}\right)^{-1}\; V_{t}\;

1319: \ket{{\vec{p}\,}'}

1320: \nonumber\\ [.3cm] & = &

1321: \sum_{n\ell  m}\;\bra{\vec{p}\,}\;\left[ V_{t}\right]^{T}\;

1322: \fnd{\ket{n\ell  m}\;\bra{n\ell  m}}{E(p)-E_{n\ell }}

1323: \; V_{t}\;\ket{{\vec{p}\,}'}

1324: \;\;\; .

1325: \label{MSgeneralpot1}

1326: \end{eqnarray}

1327: 

1328: \noindent

1329: Next, we insert several times unity to obtain

1330: 

1331: \begin{eqnarray}

1332: \lefteqn{\bra{\vec{p}\,}\; V\;\ket{{\vec{p}\,}'}\;=\;\sum_{n\ell  m}\;

1333: \int d^{3}r\;\int d^{3}r''\;\int d^{3}r'''\;\int d^{3}r'}

1334: \label{MSgeneralpot2}\\ [.3cm] & &

1335: \times\;\fnd{1}{E(p)-E_{n\ell }}\;

1336: \bracket{\vec{p}\,}{\vec{r}\,}\bra{\vec{r}\,}\;

1337: \left[ V_{t}\right]^{T}\;\ket{{\vec{r}\,}''}

1338: \bracket{{\vec{r}\,}''}{n\ell  m}

1339: \bracket{n\ell  m}{{\vec{r}\,}'''}\bra{{\vec{r}\,}'''}\;

1340: V_{t}\;\ket{{\vec{r}\,}'}\bracket{{\vec{r}\,}'}{{\vec{p}\,}'}

1341: \;\;\; .

1342: \nonumber

1343: \end{eqnarray}

1344: 

1345: \noindent

1346: Two of the four integrations are trivial, since the local transition

1347: potential has the form

1348: 

1349: \begin{equation}

1350: \bra{\vec{r}\,}\; V_{t}\;\ket{{\vec{r}\,}'}\; =\;

1351: \fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}\;\delta\left( r-a\right)\;

1352: \delta^{(3)}\left(\vec{r}\, -{\vec{r}\,}'\right)

1353: \;\;\; .

1354: \label{Vtnonlocal}

1355: \end{equation}

1356: 

1357: \noindent

1358: By inserting expression (\ref{Vtnonlocal}) into Eq.~(\ref{MSgeneralpot2}),

1359: also substituting $\bracket{\vec{r}\,}{\vec{p}\,}\; =\;

1360: e^\x{i\vec{p}\cdot\vec{r}}/(2\pi)^{3/2}$,

1361: we get

1362: 

1363: \begin{eqnarray}

1364: \lefteqn{\bra{\vec{p}\,}\; V\;\ket{{\vec{p}\,}'}\;=\;\sum_{n\ell  m}\;

1365: \int d^{3}r\;\int d^{3}r'}

1366: \label{MSgeneralpot3}\\ [.3cm] & &

1367: \times\;\fnd{1}{E(p)-E_{n\ell }}\;

1368: \fnd{e^\x{-i\vec{p}\cdot\vec{r}}}{(2\pi)^{3/2}}

1369: \fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}\;\delta\left( r-a\right)\;

1370: \bracket{\vec{r}\,}{n\ell  m}

1371: \;

1372: %\nonumber\\ [.3cm] & & \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;

1373: \bracket{n\ell  m}{{\vec{r}\,}'}\;

1374: \fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}\;\delta\left( r'-a\right)

1375: \fnd{e^\x{i{\vec{p}\,}'\cdot{{\vec{r}\,}'}}}{(2\pi)^{3/2}}

1376: \;\;\; .

1377: \nonumber

1378: \end{eqnarray}

1379: 

1380: \noindent

1381: Next, we observe that the radial parts of the two remaining integrations

1382: are also trivial, because of the two delta functions. So we twice insert

1383: the expression for the confinement eigenfunctions of Eq.~(\ref{Vccomplete}),

1384: to obtain

1385: 

1386: \begin{eqnarray}

1387: \lefteqn{\bra{\vec{p}\,}\; V\;\ket{{\vec{p}\,}'}\;=\;

1388: \fnd{1}{(2\pi)^{3}}\;

1389: \left(\fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}\right)^{2}\;\sum_{n\ell  m}\;

1390: a^{2}\int d\Omega\; a^{2}\int d\Omega '}

1391: \label{MSgeneralpot4}\\ [.3cm] & &

1392: \times\;\fnd{1}{E(p)-E_{n\ell }}\; e^\x{-i\vec{p}\cdot a\hat{r}}\;

1393: Y^{(\ell )}_{m}\left(\hat{r}\right)\;

1394: {\cal F}_{n\ell }(a)

1395: \;

1396: %\nonumber\\ [.3cm] & & \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;

1397: {Y^{(\ell )}_{m}}^{\ast}\left({\hat{r}\,}'\right)\;

1398: {\cal F}_{n\ell }^{\ast}(a)\;

1399: e^\x{i{\vec{p}\,}'\cdot a{\hat{r}\,}'}

1400: \;\;\; .

1401: \nonumber

1402: \end{eqnarray}

1403: 

1404: \noindent

1405: For the integrations over the angles we introduce Bauer's formula

1406: \cite{Bauer},

1407: 

1408: \begin{equation}

1409: e^\x{-i\vec{k}\cdot\vec{r}}\; =\;

1410: \sum_{\lambda ,\mu}4\pi (-i)^{\lambda}j_{\lambda}(kr)

1411: {Y^{(\lambda)}_{\mu}}^{\ast}\left(\hat{r}\right)

1412: Y^{(\lambda)}_{\mu}\left(\hat{k}\right)

1413: \;\;\; ,

1414: \label{Bauerform}

1415: \end{equation}

1416: 

1417: \noindent

1418: resulting in

1419: 

1420: \begin{equation}

1421: \int d\Omega\;\left\{

1422: \begin{array}{r}

1423: e^\x{-i\vec{p}\cdot a\hat{r}}\;

1424: Y^{(\ell)}_{m}\left(\hat{r}\right)\\ [.3cm]

1425: e^\x{i{\vec{p}\,}\cdot a{\hat{r}\,}}\;

1426: Y^{(\ell)}_{m}\left({\hat{r}\,}\right)

1427: \end{array}\right\}

1428: \; =\; 4\pi\; j_{\ell}(pa)\;\left\{

1429: \begin{array}{r}

1430: (-i)^{\ell}\; {Y^{(\ell )}_{m}}^{\ast}\left(\hat{p}\right)\\ [.3cm]

1431: (i)^{\ell}\; Y^{(\ell )}_{m}\left({\hat{p}\,}\right)

1432: \end{array}\right\}

1433: \;\;\; .

1434: \label{X01}

1435: \end{equation}

1436: 

1437: \noindent

1438: Substitution of the relations (\ref{X01}) into Eq.~(\ref{MSgeneralpot4})

1439: leads to the expression

1440: 

1441: \begin{equation}

1442: \bra{\vec{p}\,}\; V\;\ket{{\vec{p}\,}'}\;=\;

1443: \fnd{\lambda^{2}a^{2}}{2\pi\mu_{c}^{2}}\;

1444: \sum_{n\ell m}\;

1445: \fnd{1}{E(p)-E_{n\ell}}\; {Y^{(\ell)}_{m}}^{\ast}\left(\hat{p}\right)\;

1446: Y^{(\ell)}_{m}\left({\hat{p}\,}'\right)\;

1447: j_{\ell}(pa)\; j_{\ell}(p'a)\;

1448: \abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}

1449: \;\;\; ,

1450: \label{MSgeneralpot5}

1451: \end{equation}

1452: 

1453: \noindent

1454: where the summation over the magnetic quantum number $m$ can be performed by

1455: the use of the addition theorem, thus shaping the Born term

1456: (\ref{MSgeneralpot}) into its final form

1457: 

1458: \begin{equation}

1459: \bra{\vec{p}\,}\; V\;\ket{{\vec{p}\,}'}\; =\;

1460: \fnd{\lambda^{2}a^{2}}{8\pi^{2}\mu_{c}^{2}}\;

1461: \sum_{\ell =0}^{\infty}(2\ell +1)\;

1462: P_{\ell}\left(\hat{p}\cdot{\hat{p}\,}'\right)\;

1463: j_{\ell}(pa)\; j_{\ell}(p'a)\;

1464: \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\;\fnd

1465: {\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1466: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}

1467: \;\;\; .

1468: \label{MSgeneralpot6a}

1469: \end{equation}

1470: 

1471: \subsection{The second-order term}

1472: \label{second}

1473: 

1474: For the second-order term, we start by substituting the result

1475: (\ref{MSgeneralpot6a}) into the second term of expansion (\ref{Titeration1}),

1476: giving rise to the expression

1477: 

1478: \begin{eqnarray}

1479: \lefteqn{T^{(2)}\left({\vec{p}\;},{{\vec{p}\,}'\;}; z\right)\; =\;

1480: \int d^{3}k\;

1481: \fnd{\lambda^{2}a^{2}}{8\pi^{2}\mu_{c}^{2}}\;

1482: \sum_{\ell =0}^{\infty}(2\ell +1)\;

1483: P_{\ell}\left(\hat{p}\cdot\hat{k}\,\right)\;

1484: j_{\ell}(pa)\; j_{\ell}(ka)\;

1485: \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\;\fnd

1486: {\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1487: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}}

1488: \nonumber \\ [.3cm] & & \times\;

1489: \fnd{2\mu_{f}}{2\mu_{f} z-k^{2}}\;

1490: \fnd{\lambda^{2}a^{2}}{8\pi^{2}\mu_{c}^{2}}\;

1491: \sum_{\ell '=0}^{\infty}(2\ell '+1)\;

1492: P_{\ell '}\left(\hat{k}\cdot{\hat{p}\,}'\right)\;

1493: j_{\ell '}(ka)\; j_{\ell '}(p'a)\;

1494: \sum_{n'=0}^{\infty}\;\fnd

1495: {\abs{{\cal F}_{n'\ell '}(a)}^{2}}

1496: {E(k)-E_{n'\ell '}}

1497: \nonumber \\ [.3cm] & = &

1498: \left(\fnd{\lambda^{2}a^{2}}{8\pi^{2}\mu_{c}^{2}}\right)^{2}\;

1499: \sum_{\ell =0}^{\infty}(2\ell +1)\;

1500: j_{\ell}(pa)\;

1501: \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\;\fnd

1502: {\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1503: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}\;

1504: \sum_{\ell '=0}^{\infty}(2\ell '+1)\;

1505: j_{\ell '}(p'a)

1506: \nonumber \\ [.3cm] & & \times\;

1507: 2\mu_{f}\int d^{3}k\;

1508: P_{\ell}\left(\hat{p}\cdot\hat{k}\,\right)\;

1509: P_{\ell '}\left(\hat{k}\cdot{\hat{p}\,}'\right)\;

1510: \fnd{j_{\ell}(ka)\; j_{\ell '}(ka)}{2\mu_{f} z-k^{2}}\;

1511: \sum_{n'=0}^{\infty}\;\fnd

1512: {\abs{{\cal F}_{n'\ell '}(a)}^{2}}

1513: {E(k)-E_{n'\ell '}}

1514: \;\;\; .

1515: \label{T2def}

1516: \end{eqnarray}

1517: 

1518: \noindent

1519: The details of the $\vec{k}$ integration are discussed in

1520: Appendix~(\ref{kintegration}).

1521: Since, as required by Eq.~(\ref{calIdef}) below,

1522: $E(k)$ is quadratic in $\vec{k}$,

1523: we find for expression (\ref{T2def}) the result

1524: 

1525: \begin{eqnarray}

1526: \lefteqn{T^{(2)}\left({\vec{p}\;},{{\vec{p}\,}'\;}\right)\; =\;

1527: \left(\fnd{\lambda^{2}a^{2}}{8\pi^{2}\mu_{c}^{2}}\right)^{2}\;

1528: \sum_{\ell =0}^{\infty}(2\ell +1)\;

1529: j_{\ell}(pa)\;

1530: \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\;\fnd

1531: {\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1532: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}\;

1533: \sum_{\ell '=0}^{\infty}(2\ell '+1)\;

1534: j_{\ell '}(p'a)}

1535: \nonumber \\ [.3cm] & & \times\;

1536: \left( -i\;\fnd{4\pi^{2}\mu_{f}p}{2\ell +1}\right)\;

1537: \delta_{\ell ,\ell '}\;

1538: P_{\ell}\left(\hat{p}\cdot{\hat{p}\,}'\;\right)\;

1539: j_{\ell}(pa)\; h^{(1)}_{\ell}(pa)\;

1540: \sum_{n'=0}^{\infty}\;\fnd

1541: {\abs{{\cal F}_{n'\ell '}(a)}^{2}}

1542: {E(p)-E_{n'\ell '}}

1543: \label{T2result} \\ [.3cm] & = &

1544: -i\;\fnd{\mu_{f}p}{16\pi^{2}}\;

1545: \left(\fnd{\lambda a}{\mu_{c}}\right)^{4}\;

1546: \sum_{\ell =0}^{\infty}(2\ell +1)\;

1547: \; P_{\ell}\left(\hat{p}\cdot{\hat{p}\,}'\;\right)\;

1548: j^{2}_{\ell}(pa)\; h^{(1)}_{\ell}(pa)\; j_{\ell}(p'a)\;

1549: \left[\;

1550: \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\;\fnd

1551: {\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1552: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}\;

1553: \right]^{2}

1554: \;\;\; .

1555: \nonumber

1556: \end{eqnarray}

1557: 

1558: \subsection{To all orders}

1559: \label{all}

1560: 

1561: Following steps similar to those in Appendix~(\ref{second}),

1562: it is now straightforward to determine the higher-order contributions

1563: to the expansion (\ref{Titeration1}).

1564: For the full $T$ matrix to all orders, one ends up with the result

1565: 

1566: \begin{eqnarray}

1567: \lefteqn{T\left({\vec{p}\;},{{\vec{p}\,}'\;}\right)\; =\;}

1568: \label{Tfull} \\ [.3cm] & = &

1569: \fnd{1}{8\pi^{2}}\;

1570: \left(\fnd{\lambda a}{\mu_{c}}\right)^{2}\;

1571: \sum_{\ell =0}^{\infty}(2\ell +1)\;

1572: P_{\ell}\left(\hat{p}\cdot{\hat{p}\,}'\;\right)\;

1573: \fnd

1574: {j_{\ell}(pa)\; j_{\ell}(p'a)\;

1575: \dissum{n=0}{\infty}

1576: \fnd{\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1577: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}}

1578: {1+\frac{1}{2}i\mu_{f}p\;

1579: \left(\fnd{\lambda a}{\mu_{c}}\right)^{2}

1580: j_{\ell}(pa)\; h^{(1)}_{\ell}(pa)\;

1581: \dissum{n=0}{\infty}

1582: \fnd{\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1583: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}}

1584: \;\;\; .

1585: \nonumber

1586: \end{eqnarray}

1587: 

1588: \subsection{Scattering matrix and phase shift}

1589: \label{cotdelta}

1590: 

1591: For radially symmetric interactions, it is useful to define

1592: the partial-wave matrix element $T_{\ell}$ of the on-shell

1593: (${\vec{p}\,}'=\vec{p}$) $T$ matrix, according to

1594: the relation

1595: 

1596: \begin{equation}

1597: T\left({\vec{p}\;}\right)\; =\;

1598: \sum_{\ell =0}^{\infty}(2\ell +1)\;

1599: P_{\ell}\left(\hat{p}\cdot{\hat{p}\,}'\;\right)\;

1600: T_{\ell}(p)

1601: \;\;\; .

1602: \label{Tpartial}

1603: \end{equation}

1604: 

1605: \noindent

1606: Hence, also using the result of Eq.~(\ref{Tfull}), we find for the

1607: partial-wave scattering amplitude $S_{\ell}(p)$ the expression

1608: 

1609: \begin{eqnarray}

1610: S_{\ell}(p) & = &

1611: 1-8i\pi^{2}\mu_{f}p\; T_{\ell}(p)

1612: \label{Spartial} \\ [.3cm] & = &

1613: \fnd

1614: {1-\frac{1}{2}i\mu_{f}p\;

1615: \left(\fnd{\lambda a}{\mu_{c}}\right)^{2}

1616: j_{\ell}(pa)\; h^{(2)}_{\ell}(pa)\;

1617: \dissum{n=0}{\infty}

1618: \fnd{\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1619: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}}

1620: {1+\frac{1}{2}i\mu_{f}p\;

1621: \left(\fnd{\lambda a}{\mu_{c}}\right)^{2}

1622: j_{\ell}(pa)\; h^{(1)}_{\ell}(pa)\;

1623: \dissum{n=0}{\infty}

1624: \fnd{\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1625: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}}

1626: \;\;\; .

1627: \nonumber

1628: \end{eqnarray}

1629: 

1630: For the partial-wave scattering phase shift $\delta_{\ell}(p)$, defined by

1631: $S_{\ell}(p)\; =\; e^\x{2i\delta_{\ell}(p)}$,

1632: one obtains from Eq.~(\ref{Spartial}) the result

1633: 

1634: \begin{equation}

1635: \xrm{cotg}\left(\delta_{\ell}(p)\right)\; =\;

1636: \fnd

1637: {\frac{1}{2}\mu_{f}p\;

1638: \left(\fnd{\lambda a}{\mu_{c}}\right)^{2}

1639: j_{\ell}(pa)\; n_{\ell}(pa)\;

1640: \dissum{n=0}{\infty}

1641: \fnd{\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1642: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}\; -\; 1}

1643: {\frac{1}{2}\mu_{f}p\;

1644: \left(\fnd{\lambda a}{\mu_{c}}\right)^{2}

1645: j_{\ell}^{2}(pa)\;

1646: \dissum{n=0}{\infty}

1647: \fnd{\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

1648: {E(p)-E_{n\ell}}}

1649: \;\;\; .

1650: \label{partialpshift}

1651: \end{equation}

1652: 

1653: Formula (\ref{cotgdS}) for the meson-meson scattering phase shift

1654: is based on the latter equation, but not exclusively, as

1655: we discuss in Appendix~(\ref{Deltaell}).

1656: 

1657: \subsection{Details of the \bm{\vec{k}} integration}

1658: \label{kintegration}

1659: 

1660: Let us study the momentum-space integration

1661: 

1662: \begin{eqnarray}

1663: \lefteqn{{\cal I}_{\ell}

1664: \left({\vec{p}\;},{{\vec{p}\,}'\;};\mu\; ;f_{\ell}\right)\; =}

1665: \label{calIdef} \\ [.3cm] & & =

1666: 2\mu\;\int d^{3}k\;

1667: P_{\ell}\left(\hat{p}\cdot{\hat{k}\;}\right)\;

1668: P_{\ell '}\left(\hat{k}\cdot{\hat{p}\,}'\right)\;

1669: \fnd{j_{\ell}(ka)\; j_{\ell '}(ka)}{2\mu z-k^{2}}\;

1670: f_{\ell}\left( k^{2}\right)

1671: \nonumber \\ [.3cm] & & =

1672: 2\mu\;\int d\Omega_{k}\;

1673: P_{\ell}\left(\hat{p}\cdot{\hat{k}\;}\right)\;

1674: P_{\ell '}\left(\hat{k}\cdot{\hat{p}\,}'\right)\;

1675: \int_{0}^{\infty} k^{2}dk\;

1676: \fnd{j_{\ell}(ka)\; j_{\ell '}(ka)}{2\mu z-k^{2}}

1677: f_{\ell}\left( k^{2}\right)

1678: \;\;\; ,

1679: \nonumber

1680: \end{eqnarray}

1681: 

1682: \noindent

1683: where $f_{\ell}$ represents an arbitrary well-behaved function of $k^2$.

1684: For the integration over the angles, we can employ the orthogonality of

1685: spherical harmonics.

1686: Hence, we must concentrate on the radial integration, i.e.,

1687: 

1688: \begin{equation}

1689: \int_{0}^{\infty} k^{2}dk\;

1690: \fnd{j^{2}_{\ell}(ka)}{2\mu z-k^{2}}\;

1691: f_{\ell}\left( k^{2}\right)

1692: \;\;\; .

1693: \label{kmodpart}

1694: \end{equation}

1695: 

1696: \noindent

1697: We shall show below that the integration can easily be performed, yielding

1698: 

1699: \begin{equation}

1700: \int_{0}^{\infty} k^{2}dk\;

1701: \fnd{j^{2}_{\ell}(ka)}{2\mu z-k^{2}}\;

1702: f_{\ell}\left( k^{2}\right)\; =\;

1703: \frac{1}{2}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} k^{2}dk\;

1704: \fnd{j_{\ell}(ka)\; h^{(1)}_{\ell}(ka)}{2\mu z-k^{2}}\;

1705: f_{\ell}\left( k^{2}\right)

1706: \;\;\; ,

1707: \label{kmodpart1}

1708: \end{equation}

1709: 

1710: \noindent

1711: by using the following properties of the spherical

1712: Bessel and Hankel functions:

1713: 

1714: \begin{equation}

1715: j_{\ell}\left(e^\x{\pi i}\; ka\right)\; =\;

1716: e^\x{\pi i\ell}\; j_{\ell}(ka)

1717: \;\;\;\xrm{and}\;\;\;\;

1718: h^{(1)}_{\ell}\left(e^\x{\pi i}\; ka\right)\; =\;

1719: e^\x{-\pi i\ell}\; h^{(2)}_{\ell}(ka)

1720: \;\;\; .

1721: \label{BesHanprop}

1722: \end{equation}

1723: 

1724: \noindent

1725: For large imaginary part of the argument $ka$, the function

1726: $h^{(1)}_{\ell}(ka)$ tends to zero. Therefore, we can close the integration

1727: path in the complex $k$ plane by a non-contributing semicircle in the upper

1728: half plane. If we then set $2\mu z\; =\; (p+i\epsilon )^{2}$,

1729: taking the limit $\epsilon\downarrow 0$ after the integration, the integral

1730: (\ref{kmodpart1}) can be simply computed with Cauchy's residue theorem,

1731: yielding

1732: 

1733: \begin{eqnarray}

1734: \int_{0}^{\infty} k^{2}dk\;

1735: \fnd{j^{2}_{\ell}(ka)}{2\mu z-k^{2}}\;

1736: f_{\ell}\left( k^{2}\right) & = &

1737: \lim_{\epsilon\downarrow 0}\;

1738: \frac{1}{2}\oint k^{2}dk\;

1739: \fnd{j_{\ell}(ka)\; h^{(1)}_{\ell}(ka)}

1740: {(p+i\epsilon -k)(p+i\epsilon +k)}\;

1741: f_{\ell}\left( k^{2}\right)

1742: \nonumber \\ [.3cm] & = &

1743: -\fnd{i\pi p}{2}\; j_{\ell}(pa)\; h^{(1)}_{\ell}(pa)\;

1744: f_{\ell}\left( p^{2}\right)

1745: \;\;\; .

1746: \label{kmodpart2}

1747: \end{eqnarray}

1748: 

1749: Putting everything together, we obtain for Eq.~(\ref{calIdef}) the final result

1750: 

1751: \begin{equation}

1752: {\cal I}_{\ell}

1753: \left({\vec{p}\;},{{\vec{p}\,}'\;};\mu\; ;f_{\ell}\right)\; =\;

1754: -i\;\fnd{4\pi^{2}\mu p}{2\ell +1}\;\delta_{\ell ,\ell '}

1755: \; P_{\ell}\left(\hat{p}\cdot{\hat{p}\,}'\;\right)\;

1756: j_{\ell}(pa)\; h^{(1)}_{\ell}(pa)\;

1757: f_{\ell}\left( p^{2}\right)

1758: \;\;\; .

1759: \label{kintresult}

1760: \end{equation}

1761: 

1762: \section{The phase shift in the configuration-space approach}

1763: \label{Delta}

1764: 

1765: The radial wave equation, following from Eq.~(\ref{c2x2weqCS})

1766: by choosing

1767: 

1768: \begin{equation}

1769: \left(\begin{array}{c} \psi_{c}\left(\vec{r}\;\right) \\ [.3cm]

1770: \psi_{f}\left(\vec{r}\;\right)\end{array}\right)\; =\;

1771: \left(\begin{array}{c}

1772: \fnd{u_{c}(r)}{r}\; Y^{(\ell )}_{\ell_{z}}(\vartheta ,\varphi ) \\ [.3cm]

1773: \fnd{u_{f}(r)}{r}\; Y^{(\ell )}_{\ell_{z}}(\vartheta ,\varphi )

1774: \end{array}\right)

1775: \;\;\; ,

1776: \label{angdeco}

1777: \end{equation}

1778: 

1779: \noindent

1780: is given by

1781: 

1782: \begin{equation}

1783: \left(\begin{array}{cc} h_{c} & \lambda V(r)\\ [.3cm]

1784: \lambda V(r) & h_{f}\end{array}\right)\;

1785: \left(\begin{array}{c} u_{c} \\ [.3cm] u_{f}\end{array}\right)\; =\;

1786: E\;\left(\begin{array}{c} u_{c} \\ [.3cm] u_{f}\end{array}\right)

1787: \;\;\; ,

1788: \label{2x2weq2}

1789: \end{equation}

1790: 

1791: \noindent

1792: where (see Eq.~(\ref{Opmodel}))

1793: 

1794: \begin{eqnarray}

1795: h_{c} & = & \fnd{1}{2\mu_{c}}

1796: \left( -\fnd{d^{2}}{dr^{2}}\; +\;

1797: \fnd{\ell\left(\ell +1\right)}{r^{2}}\right)\; +\;

1798: m_{q}\; +\; m_{\bar{q}}\; +\; V_{c}(r)

1799: \;\;\; ,

1800: \nonumber \\ [.3cm]

1801: h_{f} & = & \fnd{1}{2\mu_{f}}

1802: \left( -\fnd{d^{2}}{dr^{2}}\; +\;

1803: \fnd{\ell \left(\ell +1\right)}{r^{2}}\right)\; +\;

1804: M_{1}\; +\; M_{2}

1805: \;\;\; , \;\;\;\xrm{and}

1806: \nonumber \\ [.3cm]

1807: V & = & \fnd{1}{2\mu_{c}a}\;\delta\left( r-a\right)

1808: \;\;\; .

1809: \label{2x2f1dlt}

1810: \end{eqnarray}

1811: In this section, we study the solutions of the $2\times 2$ radial wave

1812: equation (\ref{2x2weq2}) in configuration space.

1813: 

1814: For $r<a$ as well as for $r>a$, one has to solve the two uncoupled

1815: differential equations, equivalent to $\lambda =0$, given by

1816: 

1817: \begin{equation}

1818: \left(\begin{array}{cc} h_{c} & 0 \\ [.3cm] 0 & h_{f}\end{array}\right)\;

1819: \left(\begin{array}{c} u_{c}\\ [.3cm] u_{f}\end{array}\right)\; =\;

1820: E\;\left(\begin{array}{c} u_{c}\\ [.3cm] u_{f}\end{array}\right)

1821: \;\;\; .

1822: \label{uncoupled}

1823: \end{equation}

1824: At $r=a$ one has the boundary conditions

1825: 

1826: \begin{equation}

1827: \left\{\begin{array}{l}

1828: \fnd{1}{2\mu_{c}}

1829: \left( -\left.\fnd{d\; u_{c}(r)}{dr}\right|_{r\downarrow a}\; +\;

1830: \left.\fnd{d\; u_{c}(r)}{dr}\right|_{r\uparrow a}\right)\; +\;

1831: \fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}u_{f}(a)\; =\; 0 \\ [1cm]

1832: \fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}u_{c}(a)\; +\;\fnd{1}{2\mu_{f}}

1833: \left( -\left.\fnd{d\; u_{f}(r)}{dr}\right|_{r\downarrow a}\; +\;

1834: \left.\fnd{d\; u_{f}(r)}{dr}\right|_{r\uparrow a}\right)

1835: \; =\; 0\end{array}\right.

1836: \;\;\; ,

1837: \label{reqa1}

1838: \end{equation}

1839: 

1840: \noindent

1841: and

1842: 

1843: \begin{equation}

1844: \left\{\begin{array}{l}

1845: u_{c}(r\uparrow a)\; =\; u_{c}(r\downarrow a)\\ [.3cm]

1846: u_{f}(r\uparrow a)\; =\; u_{f}(r\downarrow a)\end{array}

1847: \right.

1848: \;\;\; .

1849: \label{reqa2}

1850: \end{equation}

1851: 

1852: \noindent

1853: Further boundary conditions are the usual ones:

1854: the wave functions $u_{c}$ and $u_{f}$ must both vanish at the origin.

1855: Towards infinity, the wave function $u_{c}$ must be damped exponentially, since

1856: $u_{c}$ describes a confined system, whereas, above threshold

1857: ($E\;>\; M_{1}+M_{2}$), the wave function $u_{f}$ must

1858: have an oscillating behavior, describing the scattered mesons.

1859: 

1860: Let us denote by $F_{c,\ell}$ and $G_{c,\ell}$

1861: the solutions of the upper differential

1862: equation of Eq.~(\ref{uncoupled}), which vanish at the origin and fall off

1863: exponentially at infinity, respectively.

1864: The solution $F_{c,\ell}(E,r)$ is regular at the origin,

1865: but is irregular at infinity,

1866: except for some special cases known as the confinement spectrum,

1867: whereas $G_{c,\ell}(E,r)$ behaves regularly at infinity but not at the origin.

1868: For arguments belonging to the confinement spectrum, $F_{c,\ell}$ and

1869: $G_{c,\ell}$ are degenerate and normalizable.

1870: 

1871: The lower differential equation Eq.~(\ref{uncoupled}) is solved by the

1872: functions $J$ and $N$ defined by

1873: 

1874: \begin{equation}

1875: J_{\ell}(k,r)\; =\; k^{-\ell}rj_{\ell}(kr)

1876: \;\;\;\xrm{and}\;\;\;

1877: N_{\ell}(k,r)\; =\; k^{\ell +1}rn_{\ell}(kr)

1878: \;\;\; ,

1879: \label{BN}

1880: \end{equation}

1881: 

1882: \noindent

1883: where the linear momentum $k$ is given by

1884: \begin{equation}

1885: k^{2}\; =\; 2\mu_{f}\left( E-M_{1}-M_{2}\right)

1886: \;\;\; ,

1887: \label{2muEek}

1888: \end{equation}

1889: 

1890: \noindent

1891: and where $j_{\ell}$ and $n_{\ell}$ are the spherical Bessel and Neumann

1892: functions, respectively.

1893: The solution $J_{\ell}(k,r)$ satisfies the usual boundary condition at the

1894: origin, i.e., $J_{\ell}(r\rightarrow 0)\rightarrow 0$.

1895: For the solutions (\ref{BN}) one has the Wronskian relation

1896: 

1897: \begin{equation}

1898: W\left( J_{\ell}(k,a),N_{\ell}(k,a)\right)\; =\;

1899: \left[ J_{\ell}(k,r)\fnd{d\; N_{\ell}(k,r)}{dr}-

1900: \fnd{d\; J_{\ell}(k,r)}{dr}N_{\ell}(k,r)\right]_{r\rightarrow a}\; =\; 1

1901: \;\;\; .

1902: \label{WronskianBN}

1903: \end{equation}

1904: 

1905: A general solution of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation~(\ref{2x2f1dlt}),

1906: which, moreover, satisfies the boundary conditions at the origin and at

1907: infinity, reads

1908: 

1909: \begin{equation}

1910: \left(\begin{array}{c} u_{c}(E,r)\\ [.3cm] u_{f}(E,r)\end{array}\right)\; =\;

1911: \left\{\begin{array}{lc}

1912: \left(\begin{array}{c} F_{c,\ell}(E,r)\; A_{c}\\ [.3cm]

1913: J_{\ell }\left( k,r\right)\; A_{f}\end{array}\right) & r<a

1914: \\ [1cm]

1915: \left(\begin{array}{c} G_{c,\ell}(E,r)\; B_{c}\\ [.3cm]

1916: \left[

1917: J_{\ell }\left( k,r\right)

1918: k^{2\ell +1}\xrm{cotg}\left(\delta_{\ell }(E)\right)-

1919: N_{\ell }\left( k,r\right)\right]\; B_{f}

1920: \end{array}\right) & r>a

1921: \end{array}\right. \;\;\;\; ,

1922: \label{solution1}

1923: \end{equation}

1924: 

1925: \noindent

1926: where $A_{c}$, $A_{f}$, $B_{c}$ and $B_{f}$ are normalization constants,

1927: which are not independent because of the boundary conditions~(\ref{reqa1})

1928: and (\ref{reqa2}).

1929: From the boundary conditions~(\ref{reqa2}) we derive the equations

1930: 

1931: \begin{equation}

1932: \begin{array}{rcl}

1933: F_{c,\ell}(E,a)\; A_{c} & = & G_{c,\ell}(E,a)\; B_{c}

1934: \;\;\; , \\ [.3cm]

1935: J_{\ell }\left( k,a\right)\; A_{f} & = &

1936: \left[

1937: J_{\ell }\left( k,a\right)

1938: k^{2\ell +1}\xrm{cotg}\left(\delta_{\ell }(E)\right)-

1939: N_{\ell }\left( k,a\right)\right]\; B_{f}

1940: \;\;\; .

1941: \label{reqa2a}

1942: \end{array}

1943: \end{equation}

1944: 

1945: \noindent

1946: Similarly, from the boundary conditions~(\ref{reqa1}) we obtain

1947: \begin{equation}

1948: \begin{array}{rcl}

1949: \fnd{1}{2\mu_{c}}\left( G'_{c}(E,a)B_{c}-F'_{c}(E,a)A_{c}\right)

1950: & = &\fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}J_{\ell }\left( k,a\right) A_{f}

1951: \;\;\; , \\ [.3cm]

1952: \fnd{1}{2\mu_{f}}\left(

1953: \left[ J'_{\ell }\left( k,a\right)k^{2\ell +1}

1954: \xrm{cotg}\left(\delta_{\ell }(E)\right)-

1955: N'_{\ell }\left( k,a\right)\right] B_{f}-

1956: J'_{\ell }\left( k,a\right) A_{f}\right) & = &

1957: \fnd{\lambda}{2\mu_{c}a}F_{c,\ell}(E,a) A_{c}

1958: \;\;\; .

1959: \label{reqa1a}

1960: \end{array}

1961: \end{equation}

1962: 

1963: \noindent

1964: By elimination of the normalization constants, one finds

1965: for the cotangent of the phase shift the expression

1966: 

1967: \begin{equation}

1968: k^{2\ell +1}\xrm{cotg}\left(\delta_{\ell }(E)\right)\; =\;

1969: \fnd{N_{\ell }\left( k,a\right)}{J_{\ell }\left( k,a\right)}\; -\;

1970: \left[\lambda^{2}\fnd{\mu_{f}}{\mu_{c}}\fnd{1}{a^{2}}

1971: J^{2}_{\ell }\left( k,a\right)

1972: \fnd{F_{c,\ell}(E,a)G_{c,\ell}(E,a)}{W\left(F_{c,\ell},G_{c,\ell}\right)}

1973: \right]^{-1}

1974: \;\;\; ,

1975: \label{phshft1}

1976: \end{equation}

1977: 

1978: \noindent

1979: Using moreover the relations~(\ref{BN}), we arrive at

1980: 

1981: \begin{equation}

1982: \xrm{cotg}\left(\delta_{\ell }(E)\right)\; =\;

1983: \fnd{n_{\ell }\left( ka\right)}{j_{\ell }\left( ka\right)}\; -\;

1984: \left[\lambda^{2}\fnd{\mu_{f}k}{\mu_{c}a^{2}}\;

1985: j^{2}_{\ell }\left( ka\right)\;

1986: \fnd{F_{c,\ell}(E,a)G_{c,\ell}(E,a)}{W\left(F_{c,\ell},G_{c,\ell}\right)}

1987: \right]^{-1}

1988: \;\;\; .

1989: \label{phshft2}

1990: \end{equation}

1991: 

1992: Note that, in Eq.~(\ref{phshft2}), we have obtained a simpler expression for

1993: the phase shift than in Eq.~(\ref{partialpshift}), in particular numerically,

1994: since the convergence of the sum in Eq.~(\ref{partialpshift}) is very slow.

1995: It is, moreover, amusing that we have thus derived, as a side result, a

1996: ``simple'' (depending on one's taste) proof for the following

1997: {\it spectral representation} \/of the Green's function:

1998: 

1999: \begin{equation}

2000: \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\fnd{\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell}(a)}^{2}}

2001: {E-E_{n\ell}}\; =\;\fnd{2\mu_{c}}{a^{4}}\;

2002: \fnd{F_{c,\ell}(E,a)G_{c,\ell}(E,a)}

2003: {W\left(F_{c,\ell}(E,a),G_{c,\ell}(E,a)\right)}

2004: \;\;\; .

2005: \label{Complitude}

2006: \end{equation}

2007: 

2008: \noindent

2009: This relation must be true for any confining potential with an infinite

2010: discrete set of radial and angular excitations.

2011: The set of functions $\left\{{\cal F}_{n\ell}\; ;\; n=0,1,2,\dots\right\}$

2012: represents, for orbital angular momentum $\ell$,

2013: a full set of radial eigensolutions, with eigenvalue $E_{n\ell}$,

2014: of the Hamiltonian $H_{c}$.

2015: Furthermore, $F_{c,\ell}$ and $G_{c,\ell}$ represent two linearly

2016: independent solutions for any value of the energy $E$.

2017: 

2018: \section{More realistic ``phase'' transitions}

2019: \label{Deltaell}

2020: 

2021: The results of Appendices~(\ref{Tmtrx}) and (\ref{Delta}) are illustrative

2022: for studying the skeleton of the calculus involved in determining

2023: the elastic scattering phase shifts,

2024: but do not represent the coupling of quark-antiquark states to

2025: meson-meson systems.

2026: An easy way to understand this is by comparing the parities of both

2027: phases of the system.

2028: Due to Fermi statistics, the parity of the $q\bar{q}$ phase is given

2029: by $P=(-1)^{\ell_{c}+1}$.

2030: On the other hand, from Bose statistics follows that the parity of the

2031: meson-meson phase is given by $P=(-1)^{\ell_{f}}$.

2032: One concludes that the orbital angular momenta $\ell_{c}$ and $\ell_{f}$

2033: for respectively the $q\bar{q}$ phase and the meson-meson phase,

2034: must differ at least one unit.

2035: Hence, the potential given in Eq.~(\ref{Opmodel}) cannot couple

2036: the two different phases.

2037: Nevertheless, expression (\ref{partialpshift}) for the scattering

2038: phase shift is a powerful tool for further investigation.

2039: In Appendix~(\ref{Delta}) we obtained a different form for this quantity.

2040: Now the procedure leading from Eq.~(\ref{2x2weq2}) to

2041: Eq.~(\ref{phshft2}) can be repeated for the more general case,

2042: given by

2043: 

2044: \begin{eqnarray}

2045: h_{c} & = & \fnd{1}{2\mu_{c}}

2046: \left( -\fnd{d^{2}}{dr^{2}}\; +\;

2047: \fnd{\ell_{c}\left(\ell_{c}+1\right)}{r^{2}}\right)\; +\;

2048: m_{q}\; +\; m_{\bar{q}}\; +\; V_{c}(r)

2049: \;\;\; ,

2050: \nonumber \\ [.3cm]

2051: h_{f} & = & \fnd{1}{2\mu_{f}}

2052: \left( -\fnd{d^{2}}{dr^{2}}\; +\;

2053: \fnd{\ell_{f}\left(\ell_{f}+1\right)}{r^{2}}\right)\; +\;

2054: M_{1}\; +\; M_{2}

2055: \;\;\; , \;\;\;\xrm{and}

2056: \nonumber \\ [.3cm]

2057: V & = & \fnd{1}{2\mu_{c}a}\;\delta\left( r-a\right)

2058: \;\;\; .

2059: \label{2x2f2dlt}

2060: \end{eqnarray}

2061: 

2062: \noindent

2063: Substituting $\ell$ in Eq.~(\ref{phshft2}) conveniently by either

2064: $\ell_{c}$ or $\ell_{f}$,

2065: one gets for the scattering phase shift the result

2066: 

2067: \begin{equation}

2068: \xrm{cotg}\left(\delta_{\ell_{f}}(E)\right)\; =\;

2069: \fnd{n_{\ell_{f}}\left( ka\right)}{j_{\ell_{f}}\left( ka\right)}\; -\;

2070: \left[\lambda^{2}\fnd{\mu_{f}k}{\mu_{c}a^{2}}\;

2071: j^{2}_{\ell_{f}}\left( ka\right)\;

2072: \fnd{F_{c,\ell_{c}}(E,a)G_{c,\ell_{c}}(E,a)}

2073: {W\left(F_{c,\ell_{c}},G_{c,\ell_{c}}\right)}

2074: \right]^{-1}

2075: \;\;\; .

2076: \label{phshft3}

2077: \end{equation}

2078: 

2079: \noindent

2080: Then we can make use of Eq.~(\ref{Complitude}) to arrive at

2081: 

2082: \begin{equation}

2083: \xrm{cotg}\left(\delta_{\ell_{f}}(E)\right)\; =\;

2084: \fnd{n_{\ell_{f}}\left( ka\right)}{j_{\ell_{f}}\left( ka\right)}\; -\;

2085: \left[\lambda^{2}\fnd{\mu_{f}ka^{2}}{2\mu_{c}^{2}}\;

2086: j^{2}_{\ell_{f}}\left( ka\right)\;

2087: \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\fnd{\abs{{\cal F}_{n\ell_{c}}(a)}^{2}}

2088: {E-E_{n\ell_{c}}}

2089: \right]^{-1}

2090: \;\;\; .

2091: \label{phshft}

2092: \end{equation}

2093: 

2094: \noindent

2095: This is the result that can be used for our model.

2096: However, note that we have not specified how we arrived from

2097: Eq.~(\ref{c2x2weqCS}) to the relations (\ref{2x2f2dlt}).

2098: Operators which provide for the communication between channels of different

2099: orbital angular momenta and quark-antiquark spins, can be constructed

2100: \cite{PRD27p1527,ZPC21p291,ZPC17p135},

2101: but the procedure involves rather technical recoupling schemes of quantum

2102: numbers.

2103: We do not intend to go into the details here.

2104: 

2105: Extension of the formalism to potentials more realistic than a spherical

2106: delta shell is also straightforward, and can be found in

2107: Refs.~\cite{CPC27p377,LNP211p182}.

2108: However, it is opportune to mention here that the solutions of the full model

2109: \cite{ZPC30p615,PRD27p1527} do not behave differently from the simple

2110: formula~(\ref{phshft}) in the energy domain under study in this work,

2111: only yielding some minor differences in the numerical results.

2112: 

2113: \begin{thebibliography}{60}

2114: \bibitem{Montanet2003}

2115: L.~Montanet,

2116: in {\it Nyiri, J. (ed.): The Gribov theory of quark confinement}, pp. 275-296.

2117: %\href{http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?irn=5463963}{SPIRES entry}

2118: 

2119: \bibitem{NUCLEX0302007}

2120: M.~Wolke {\it et al.},

2121: arXiv:nucl-ex/0302007.

2122: %%CITATION = NUCL-EX 0302007;%%

2123: 

2124: \bibitem{HEPPH0301126}

2125: M.~B\"{u}scher, F.~P.~Sassen, N.~N.~Achasov and L.~Kondratyuk,

2126: Contribution to the workshop on the future physics program at COSY-J\"{u}lich,

2127: CSS2002,

2128: arXiv:hep-ph/0301126.

2129: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0301126;%%

2130: 

2131: \bibitem{HEPPH0302137}

2132: V.~V.~Anisovich, L.~G.~Dakhno and V.~A.~Nikonov,

2133: arXiv:hep-ph/0302137.

2134: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0302137;%%

2135: 

2136: \bibitem{HEPPH0210431}

2137: Abdou~M.~Abdel-Rehim, Deirdre~Black, Amir~H.~Fariborz, Joseph~Schechter,

2138: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67} (2003) 054001

2139: [arXiv:hep-ph/0210431].

2140: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0210431;%%

2141: 

2142: \bibitem{PLB559p49}

2143: P.~Colangelo and F.~De Fazio,

2144: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 559} (2003) 49

2145: [arXiv:hep-ph/0301267].

2146: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0301267;%%

2147: 

2148: \bibitem{HEPPH0212361}

2149: Hai-Yang Cheng,

2150: arXiv:hep-ph/0212361.

2151: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0212361;%%

2152: 

2153: \bibitem{HEPPH0212117}

2154: Hai-Yang~Cheng,

2155: arXiv:hep-ph/0212117.

2156: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0212117;%%

2157: 

2158: \bibitem{HEPPH0302059}

2159: Chuan-Hung Chen,

2160: arXiv:hep-ph/0302059.

2161: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0302059;%%

2162: 

2163: \bibitem{HEPPH0303248}

2164: S.~F.~Tuan,

2165: arXiv:hep-ph/0303248.

2166: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0303248;%%

2167: 

2168: \bibitem{HEPPH0304031}

2169: A.~Faessler, T.~Gutsche, M.~A.~Ivanov, V.~E.~Lyubovitskij and P.~Wang,

2170: arXiv:hep-ph/0304031.

2171: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0304031;%%

2172: 

2173: \bibitem{HEPPH0303223}

2174: D.~Black, M.~Harada and J.~Schechter,

2175: arXiv:hep-ph/0303223.

2176: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0303223;%%

2177: 

2178: \bibitem{PRD15p267}

2179: Robert L.~Jaffe,

2180: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 15} (1977) 267.

2181: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D15,267;%%

2182: 

2183: \bibitem{PRD66p010001}

2184: K.~Hagiwara {\it et al.} \/[Particle Data Group Collaboration],

2185: {\it Review Of Particle Physics},

2186: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66} (2002) 010001.

2187: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D66,010001;%%

2188: 

2189: \bibitem{PRD26p239}

2190: M.~D.~Scadron,

2191: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D26}, 239 (1982).

2192: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D26,239;%%

2193: 

2194: \bibitem{NPB320p1}

2195: J.~E.~Augustin {\it et al.}  [DM2 Collaboration],

2196: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 320}, 1 (1989).

2197: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B320,1;%%

2198: 

2199: \bibitem{HEPEX0204018}

2200: E.~M.~Aitala {\it et al.} [E791 Collaboration],

2201: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 89} (2002) 121801

2202: [arXiv:hep-ex/0204018].

2203: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0204018;%%

2204: 

2205: \bibitem{PRD59p074001}

2206: J.~A.~Oller, E.~Oset and J.~R.~Pel\'{a}ez,

2207: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D59} (1999) 074001

2208: [Erratum-ibid.\ {\bf D60} (1999) 099906]

2209: [arXiv:hep-ph/9804209].

2210: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9804209;%%

2211: 

2212: \bibitem{ZPC30p615}

2213: E.~van Beveren, T.~A.~Rijken, K.~Metzger, C.~Dullemond, G.~Rupp and

2214: J.~E.~Ribeiro,

2215: Z.\ Phys.\ {\bf C30} (1986) 615.

2216: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C30,615;%%

2217: 

2218: \bibitem{EPJC22p493}

2219: Eef van Beveren and George Rupp,

2220: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ {\bf C22}, 493 (2001)

2221: [arXiv:hep-ex/0106077].

2222: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0106077;%%

2223: 

2224: \bibitem{PLB449p154}

2225: A.~V.~Anisovich {\it et al.},

2226: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 449} (1999) 154.

2227: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B449,154;%%

2228: 

2229: \bibitem{PLB517p261}

2230: A.~V.~Anisovich {\it et al.},

2231: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 517} (2001) 261.

2232: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B517,261;%%

2233: 

2234: \bibitem{PRD27p1527}

2235: E.~van Beveren, G.~Rupp, T.~A.~Rijken, and C.~Dullemond,

2236: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D27} (1983) 1527.

2237: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D27,1527;%%

2238: 

2239: \bibitem{PRD44p2803}

2240: A.~G.~Verschuren, C.~Dullemond, and E.~van Beveren,

2241: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D44} (1991) 2803.

2242: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D44,2803;%%

2243: 

2244: \bibitem{PLB541p22}

2245: Claude Amsler,

2246: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 541} (2002) 22

2247: [arXiv:hep-ph/0206104].

2248: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0206104;%%

2249: 

2250: \bibitem{HEPPH0301012}

2251: L.~Ya.~Glozman,

2252: arXiv:hep-ph/0301012.

2253: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0301012;%%

2254: 

2255: \bibitem{HEPLAT0210012}

2256: Teiji~Kunihiro, Shin~Muroya, Atsushi~Nakamura, Chiho~Nonaka,

2257: Motoo~Sekiguchi and Hiroaki~Wada [SCALAR Collaboration],

2258: Talk given at 20th International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory

2259: (LATTICE 2002), Boston, Massachusetts, 24-29 Jun 2002,

2260: arXiv:hep-lat/0210012.

2261: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0210012;%%

2262: 

2263: \bibitem{HEPPH0302133}

2264: Amir~H.~Fariborz,

2265: arXiv:hep-ph/0302133.

2266: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0302133;%%

2267: 

2268: \bibitem{PRL77p2332}

2269: N.~Isgur and J.~Speth,

2270: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 77} (1996) 2332.

2271: %%CITATION = PRLTA,77,2332;%%

2272: 

2273: \bibitem{PLB361p160}

2274: E. Klempt, B.C. Metsch, C.R. M\"{u}nz and H.R. Petry,

2275: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 361} (1995) 160

2276: [arXiv:hep-ph/9507449].

2277: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9507449;%%

2278: 

2279: \bibitem{PRD63p014019}

2280: C.~M.~Shakin and Huangsheng Wang,

2281: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63} (2001) 014019.

2282: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D63,014019;%%

2283: 

2284: \bibitem{PRD65p114011}

2285: C.~M.~Shakin,

2286: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65} (2002) 114011.

2287: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D65,114011;%%

2288: 

2289: \bibitem{PRD65p078501}

2290: George Rupp, Eef van Beveren and Michael D.~Scadron,

2291: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65} (2002) 078501

2292: [arXiv:hep-ph/0104087].

2293: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104087;%%

2294: 

2295: \bibitem{EPJC10p469}

2296: Eef van Beveren and George Rupp,

2297: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ {\bf C10}, 469 (1999)

2298: [arXiv:hep-ph/9806246].

2299: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806246;%%

2300: 

2301: \bibitem{CPC27p377}

2302: C.~Dullemond, G.~Rupp, T.~A.~Rijken, and E.~van Beveren,

2303: Comp.\ Phys.\ Comm.\ {\bf 27} (1982) 377.

2304: 

2305: \bibitem{PRD21p772}

2306: E.~van Beveren, C.~Dullemond, and G.~Rupp,

2307: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D21} (1980) 772

2308: [Erratum-ibid.\ {\bf D22} (1980) 787].

2309: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D21,772;%%

2310: 

2311: \bibitem{NC14p951}

2312: Tullio~Regge,

2313: Nuovo Cim.\  {\bf 14} (1959) 951.

2314: %%CITATION = NUCIA,14,951;%%

2315: 

2316: \bibitem{PLB413p137}

2317: A.~V.~Anisovich and A.~V.~Sarantsev,

2318: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B413} (1997) 137

2319: [arXiv:hep-ph/9705401].

2320: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9705401;%%

2321: 

2322: \bibitem{HEPPH0204328}

2323: V.~V.~Anisovich and A.~V.~Sarantsev,

2324: arXiv:hep-ph/0204328.

2325: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0204328;%%

2326: 

2327: \bibitem{HEPPH0110156}

2328: Eef van Beveren and George Rupp,

2329: %Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Hadron

2330: %Spectroscopy (Hadron 2001), Protvino, Russia, 25 Aug - 1 Sep 2001,

2331: AIP Conf.\ Proc.\  {\bf 619} (2002) 209

2332: [arXiv:hep-ph/0110156].

2333: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0110156;%%

2334: 

2335: \bibitem{PRD60p034002}

2336: Amir H.~Fariborz and Joseph Schechter,

2337: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D60}, 034002 (1999)

2338: [hep-ph/9902238].

2339: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9902238;%%

2340: 

2341: \bibitem{ZPC21p291}

2342: E.~van Beveren,

2343: Z.\ Phys.\ {\bf C21} (1984) 291.

2344: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C21,291;%%

2345: 

2346: \bibitem{EPJC11p717}

2347: Eef van Beveren and George Rupp,

2348: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 11} (1999) 717

2349: [arXiv:hep-ph/9806248].

2350: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806248;%%

2351: 

2352: \bibitem{NPB587p331}

2353: Matthias Jamin, Jos\'{e}~Antonio Oller, and Antonio Pich,

2354: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B587}, 331 (2000)

2355: [hep-ph/0006045].

2356: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0006045;%%

2357: 

2358: \bibitem{PotentialScattering}

2359: V. De Alfaro and T. Regge,

2360: {\it Potential Scattering}, North Holland (Amsterdam, 1965).

2361: 

2362: \bibitem{HEPPH0203149}

2363: M.~Boglione and M.~R.~Pennington,

2364: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65} (2002) 114010

2365: [arXiv:hep-ph/0203149].

2366: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0203149;%%

2367: 

2368: \bibitem{PLB521p15}

2369: F.~De Fazio and M.~R.~Pennington,

2370: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 521} (2001) 15

2371: [arXiv:hep-ph/0104289].

2372: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104289;%%

2373: 

2374: \bibitem{NPB266p451}

2375: R.~N.~Cahn and P.~V.~Landshoff,

2376: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 266} (1986) 451.

2377: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B266,451;%%

2378: 

2379: \bibitem{HEPPH0201006}

2380: Eef van Beveren and George Rupp,

2381: Proceedings of the Workshop on Recent Developments in Particle

2382: and Nuclear Physics, April 30, 2001, Coimbra (Portugal) ISBN

2383: 972-95630-3-9, pages 1-16,

2384: [arXiv:hep-ph/0201006].

2385: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0201006;%%

2386: 

2387: \bibitem{NPA688p823}

2388: S.~N.~Cherry and M.~R.~Pennington,

2389: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 688} (2001) 823

2390: [arXiv:hep-ph/0005208].

2391: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0005208;%%

2392: 

2393: \bibitem{PRD61p014015}

2394: W.~Lee and D.~Weingarten,

2395: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D61}, 014015 (2000)

2396: [hep-lat/9910008];

2397: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9910008;%%

2398:  

2399: D.~Weingarten, private communication.

2400: 

2401: \bibitem{HEPLAT9805029}

2402: W.~Lee and D.~Weingarten,

2403: hep-lat/9805029.

2404: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9805029;%%

2405: 

2406: \bibitem{NPPS53p236}

2407: W.~Lee and D.~Weingarten,

2408: Nucl.\ Phys.\ Proc.\ Suppl.\  {\bf 53}

2409: [hep-lat/9608071].

2410: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9608071;%%

2411: 

2412: \bibitem{ZPC68p647}

2413: \author{Nils A. T\"{o}rnqvist}

2414: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 68} (1995) 647

2415: [arXiv:hep-ph/9504372].

2416: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9504372;%%

2417: 

2418: \bibitem{PRL76p1575}

2419: Nils~A.~T\"{o}rnqvist and Matts~Roos,

2420: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 76} (1996) 1575

2421: [arXiv:hep-ph/9511210].

2422: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9511210;%%

2423: 

2424: \bibitem{PLB462p14}

2425: Kim~Maltman,

2426: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B462} (1999) 14

2427: [arXiv:hep-ph/9906267].

2428: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9906267;%%

2429: 

2430: \bibitem{HEPPH0204205}

2431: Frank~E.~Close and Nils~A.~T\"{o}rnqvist,

2432: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 28} (2002) R249

2433: [arXiv:hep-ph/0204205].

2434: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0204205;%%

2435: 

2436: \bibitem{Bauer}

2437: W. Bauer, Journal f\"{u}r Mathematik {\bf LVI} (1859), pp. 104-106;

2438: see also:

2439: G.N. Watson, {\it A treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions},

2440: section 4.32.

2441: 

2442: \bibitem{ZPC17p135}

2443: E.~van Beveren,

2444: Z.\ Phys.\ {\bf C17} (1983) 135.

2445: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C17,135;%%

2446: 

2447: \bibitem{LNP211p182}

2448: E.~van Beveren, C.~Dullemond, T.~A.~Rijken, and G.~Rupp,

2449: Lect.\ Notes Phys.\  {\bf 211} (1984) 182.

2450: %%CITATION = LNPHA,211,182;%%

2451: \end{thebibliography}

2452: \end{document}

2453: