1: 

2: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

3: \input epsf.sty

4: %\topmargin   0.25in

5: \topmargin -.5cm

6: \textheight 19.5cm

7: \usepackage{epsfig}

8: \oddsidemargin -.125cm

9: 

10: \textwidth 15.5cm

11: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{eqnarray}}

12: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{eqnarray}}

13: \newcommand{\half}{\frac12}

14: \newcommand{\bi}{\bibitem}

15: \newcommand{\wg}{\wedge}

16: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.1}  %looks better

17: \newcommand{\ra}{\rangle}

18: \newcommand{\la}{\langle}

19: \newcommand{\T}{\widetilde \Phi_{CFT}}

20: \newcommand{\Cn}{{\cal C}_n}

21: \newcommand{\vp}{\varphi}

22: 

23: \newcommand{\B}{b'}

24: \newcommand{\C}{c'}

25: \newcommand{\bB}{\bar b'}

26: \newcommand{\bC}{\bar c'}

27: \newcommand{\Bu}{B_{\vec u}}

28: \newcommand{\VV}{{\cal V}}

29: \newcommand{\II}{{\cal I}}

30: \newcommand{\HH}{{\cal H}}

31: \newcommand{\MM}{{\cal M}}

32: \newcommand{\BB}{{\cal B}}

33: \newcommand{\CC}{{\cal C}}

34: \newcommand{\OO}{{\cal O}}

35: \newcommand{\QQ}{{\cal Q}}

36: \newcommand{\PP}{{\cal P}}

37: \newcommand{\EE}{{\cal E}}

38: \newcommand{\LL}{{\cal L}}

39: \newcommand{\SSS} {{\cal S}}

40: \newcommand{\lll}{\langle\langle}

41: \newcommand{\rrr}{\rangle\rangle}

42: 

43: \newcommand{\wt}{\widetilde}

44: \newcommand{\wh}{\widehat}

45: \newcommand{\wc}{\check}

46: \newcommand{\wb}{\bar}

47: \newcommand{\bd}{\bar{\rm D}}

48: \newcommand{\RR}{{\cal R}}

49: \newcommand{\NN}{{\cal N}}

50: \newcommand{\TT}{{\cal T}}

51: \newcommand{\bet}{\beta'}

52: \newcommand{\gam}{\gamma'}

53: \newcommand{\WW}{{\cal W}}

54: \newcommand{\nl}{\hspace{-.65cm}}

55: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}

56: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}

57: \newcommand{\ben}{\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle}

58: \newcommand{\een}{\end{eqnarray}}

59: \newcommand{\refb}[1]{(\ref{#1})}

60: \newcommand{\p}{\partial}

61: \newcommand{\sectiono}[1]{\section{#1}\setcounter{equation}{0}}

62: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}

63: 

64: 

65: 

66: \def\sqr#1#2{{\vcenter{\vbox{\hrule height.#2pt

67:          \hbox{\vrule width.#2pt height#1pt \kern#1pt

68:             \vrule width.#2pt}

69:          \hrule height.#2pt}}}}

70: \def\square{\mathop{\mathchoice\sqr66\sqr66\sqr{3.75}4\sqr34\,}\nolimits}

71: 

72: 

73: 

74: \begin{document}

75: 

76: {}~ \hfill\vbox{\hbox{hep-ph/0309305} \hbox{PUPT-2097} }\break

77: 

78: \vskip 1cm

79: 

80: \begin{center}

81: \Large{\bf Is ${\bf \Theta^+ (1540)}$ a Kaon--Skyrmion Resonance?}

82: 

83: \vspace{20mm}

84: 

85: \normalsize{Nissan Itzhaki, Igor R. Klebanov, Peter Ouyang, and

86: Leonardo Rastelli}

87: 

88: \vspace{10mm}

89: 

90: \normalsize{\em Joseph Henry Laboratories, Princeton University,}

91: 

92: \vspace{0.2cm}

93: 

94: \normalsize{\em Princeton, New Jersey 08544, USA}

95: \end{center}

96: 

97: \vspace{10mm}

98: 

99: 

100: \begin{abstract}

101: 

102: \medskip

103: 

104: 

105: We reconsider the relationship between the bound state and the $SU(3)$

106: rigid rotator approaches to strangeness in the Skyrme model. For

107: non-exotic $S=-1$ baryons the bound state approach matches for small

108: $m_K$ onto the rigid rotator approach, and the bound state mode turns

109: into the rotator zero-mode. However, for small $m_K$, we find no

110: $S=+1$ kaon bound states or resonances in the spectrum, confirming

111: previous work. This suggests that, at least for large $N$ and small

112: $m_K$, the exotic state may be an artifact of the rigid rotator

113: approach to the Skyrme model. An $S=+1$ near-threshold state comes

114: into existence only for sufficiently large $SU(3)$ breaking. If such a

115: state exists, then it has the expected quantum numbers of $\Theta^+$:

116: $I=0$, $J=\frac{1}{2}$ and positive parity.  Other exotic states with

117: $(I=1, J^P=\frac{3}{2}^+)$, $(I=1,J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+)$,

118: $(I=2, J^P=\frac{5}{2}^+)$ and $(I=2,J^P=\frac{3}{2}^+)$

119: appear as its

120: $SU(2)$ rotator excitations. As a test of our methods, we also

121: identify a D-wave $S=-1$ near-threshold resonance that, upon $SU(2)$

122: collective coordinate quantization, reproduces the mass splittings of

123: the observed states $\Lambda(1520)$, $\Sigma(1670)$ and $\Sigma(1775)$

124: with good accuracy.

125: 

126: 

127: 

128: \end{abstract}

129: 

130: \newpage

131: 

132: 

133: 

134: 

135: \section{Introduction}

136: 

137: A remarkable recent event in hadronic physics is the discovery of a

138: $S=+1$ baryon (dubbed the $Z^+$ or $\Theta^+$) with a mass of

139: 1540 MeV and width less than 25 MeV \cite{Nakano}. This discovery was

140: promptly

141: confirmed in \cite{Barmin,Stepanyan,Barth, Asratyan}.  At  present  the

142: spin, parity and magnetic moment of this state have not been

143: determined; one group, the SAPHIR collaboration \cite{Barth}, found

144: that the isospin of the $\Theta^+$ is zero.  Because it appears as a

145: resonance in the system $K^+ n$, the minimal possibility for its quark

146: content is $uudd\bar{s}$ which is manifestly exotic, {\it i.e.} it

147: cannot be

148: made out of three non-relativistic quarks. Early speculations on this

149: kind of exotic baryons were made in \cite{Jaffe,Strottman}.

150: Remarkably, a state with these quantum numbers appears naturally

151: \cite{Manohar,Chemtob,Praszalowicz} in the rigid rotator quantization

152: of the three-flavor Skyrme model \cite{Witten,Guad,MNP}, and detailed

153: predictions for its mass and width were made by Diakonov, Petrov and

154: Polyakov \cite{DPP}.  Their results provided motivation for the

155: experimental searches that led to the discovery of $\Theta^+$ very

156: close to the predicted parameters.\footnote{For other recent

157: theoretical models of $\Theta^+$, see,

158: e.g. \cite{Stancu,Karliner,JW,Cheung,Jennings,Csikor}.}

159: 

160: \smallskip

161: 

162: The rigid rotator quantization of the Skyrme model that was used in

163: \cite{DPP} relied on working directly with $N=3$ ($N$ is the number of

164: colors). Then the model predicts the well-known ${\bf 8}$ and ${\bf

165: 10}$ of $SU(3)$, followed by an exotic ${\bf \overline {10}}$

166: multiplet whose $S=+1$ member is the $\Theta^+$.  The approach of

167: \cite{DPP} began by postulating that the established $N(1710)$ and

168: $\Sigma(1880)$ states are members of the anti-decuplet.  Then, using

169: group theory techniques, and constraints from a rigid rotator

170: treatment of chiral solitons, they estimated the mass and width of the

171: other states in this multiplet.  They predicted that the lowest member

172: of

173: the anti-decuplet has a mass of 1530 MeV and width of about 9

174: MeV.

175: These results appear to be confirmed strikingly by

176: experiment.\footnote{Note that the authors of

177: \cite{Nussinov,Arndt,Casher,Krein} have

178: argued that the experimental data actually indicate an even smaller

179: width.}

180: 

181: \smallskip

182: 

183: In this paper we will follow a somewhat different strategy, trying to

184: develop a systematic $1/N$ expansion for $\Theta^+$. In the two-flavor

185: Skyrme model,  the

186: quantum numbers of the low-lying states do not depend on $N$, as

187: long as it is odd: $I=J= \frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2}, \ldots$

188: ($I$ is the isospin and and $J$ is the spin).

189:  These states are identified

190: with the nucleon and the $\Delta$ \cite{Skyrme, Adkins}.  The

191: three-flavor

192: case is rather different, since even the lowest $SU(3)$ multiplets

193: depend on $N=2n+1$ and become large as $N\to \infty$.  The allowed

194: multiplets must contain states of hypercharge $N/3$, {\it i.e.} of

195: strangeness $S=0$.  In the notation where $SU(3)$ multiplets are

196: labeled by $(p,q)$, the lowest multiplets one finds are $(1,n)$ with

197: $J=\frac{1}{2}$ and $(3,n-1)$ with $J=\frac{3}{2}$

198: \cite{Vadim,Dul,IRK,Cohen,DP}.

199: These are the large $N$ analogues of the octet and the decuplet. The

200: rigid rotator mass formula, valid in the limit of unbroken $SU(3)$, is

201: \begin{equation} \label{exactform}

202: M^{(p,q)}= M_{cl}+{1\over 2\Omega} J(J+1)

203: +{1\over 2\Phi} \left (C^{(p,q)} - J(J+1) -\frac{ N^2}{12} \right ) \, ,

204: \end{equation}

205: where $\Omega$ and $\Phi$ are moments of inertia, which are

206: of order $N$.

207: Using the formula for the quadratic Casimir,

208: \begin{equation}

209: C^{(p,q)} = {1\over 3} [ p^2+ q^2 + 3(p+q) + pq ]

210:  \, ,

211: \end{equation}

212: one notes \cite{Vadim,Dul,IRK,Cohen,DP}

213: that the lowest lying $SU(3)$ multiplets

214: $(2J, n+{1\over 2}- J)$, of spin $J={1\over 2}, {3\over 2}, \ldots$

215: obey the mass formula

216: \begin{equation} \label{lowest}

217: M(J)= M_{cl}+{N\over 4\Phi}+ {1\over 2\Omega} J(J+1)

218: \, .

219: \end{equation}

220: Exactly the same multiplets appear when we construct baryon states out

221: of $N$

222: quarks. The splittings among them are of order $1/N$,

223: as is usual for soliton rotation excitations.

224: 

225: \smallskip

226: 

227: The large $N$ analogue of the exotic antidecuplet is

228: $(0, n+2)$ with $J=\frac{1}{2}$. Its splitting from the lowest

229: multiplets is ${N\over 4\Phi} + O(1/N)$.

230: The fact that it is of order $N^0$ raises questions

231: about the validity of the rigid rotator approach to these

232: states \cite{KK,IRK,Cohen}. Indeed, we will argue that a better

233: approximation

234: to these states is provided by the bound state approach \cite{CK}.

235: In the bound state approach one departs from the rigid rotator

236: ansatz, and adopts more general kaon fluctuation profiles.

237: This has $O(N^0)$ effect on energies of states even in the

238: low-lying non-exotic multiplets, after $SU(3)$ breaking is turned on.

239: In the limit $m_K\to 0$ the bound state description of non-exotic

240: baryons smoothly approaches the rigid rotator description, and

241: the bound state wave function approaches the zero-mode

242: $\sin (F(r)/2)$ \cite{CK,CHK}, where $F(r)$ is the radial profile

243: function

244: of the skyrmion.

245: 

246: \smallskip

247: 

248: Our logic leads us to believe that, at least from the point of view of

249: the large $N$ expansion, $\Theta^+$ should be described by a

250: near-threshold

251: kaon-skyrmion resonance or bound state of $S=+1$, rather

252: than by a rotator state (a similar suggestion was

253: made independently in \cite{Cohen,Lebed}).

254: This is akin to the bound state

255: description of the $S=-1$ baryons in \cite{CK} where a possibility of

256: such a description of an exotic $S=+1$ state was mentioned as well.

257: This leads us to a puzzle, however, since, in contrast with the

258: situation for $S=-1$, for $S=+1$ there is no fluctuation mode that in

259: the $m_K\to 0$ limit approaches the rigid rotator mode of energy

260: ${N\over 4\Phi}$ (this will be shown explicitly in section 3). An

261: essential difficulty is that, for small $m_K$, this is not a

262: near-threshold state; hence, it is not too surprising that it does not

263: show up in the more general fluctuation analysis.  Thus, for large $N$

264: and small $m_K$ the rigid rotator state with $S=+1$

265: appears to be an artifact of the rigid

266: rotator approximation (we believe this to be a general statement that

267: does

268: not depend on the details of the chiral lagrangian).

269: 

270: \smallskip

271: 

272: Next we ask what happens as we increase $m_K$ keeping other parameters

273: in the kaon-skyrmion Lagrangian fixed. For $m_K=495 MeV$, and with the

274: standard fit values of $f_\pi$ and $e$, neither bound states

275: \cite{CHK} nor resonances \cite{Scoc} exist for $S=+1$.\footnote{

276:  Such states seem to appear in \cite{KM}. However, in the

277: normalization of the Wess-Zumino term, which is repulsive for $S=+1$

278: states, a large factor of $e^2\sim 30$ was apparently omitted there

279: (compare eq. (7) of \cite{KM} with \cite{CHK}). When this factor is

280: reinstated, both bound states and resonances disappear for standard

281: parameter choices, as claimed in \cite{CHK,Scoc} and confirmed in this

282: work.}  If, however, we increase $m_K$ to $\approx 1 GeV$ then a

283: near-threshold state appears. Thus, we reach a surprising conclusion

284: that,

285: at least for large $N$, {\it the exotic $S=+1$ state exists only due

286: to the $SU(3)$ breaking and disappears when the breaking is too weak}.

287: While this certainly contradicts the philosophy of \cite{DP}, it is

288: actually in line with some of the earlier literature (see, for

289: example, \cite{Riska} and

290: the end of \cite{Weigel}). An intuitive way to see the

291: necessity of the $SU(3)$ breaking for the existence of the exotic is

292: that the breaking keeps it a near-threshold state.

293: 

294: \smallskip

295: 

296: One of the purposes of this paper is to examine how sensitive the

297: existence of this state is to parameter choices.  If we set

298: $m_K=495\,$MeV, then minor adjustments of $f_\pi$ and $e$ do not make

299: the $S=+1$ resonance appear.  We will find, however, that if the

300: strength of the Wess-Zumino term is reduced by roughly a factor of 0.4

301: compared to its $SU(3)$ value, then a near-threshold state corresponding

302: to $\Theta^+$ is indeed found.  Although we do not have a good a

303: priori explanation for this reduction, it could be caused by

304: unexpectedly large $SU(3)$ breaking effects on this particular

305: term. This issue clearly requires further investigation.

306: 

307: \smallskip

308: 

309: The structure of the paper is as follows. In the next section we will

310: review the rigid rotator approach to Skyrme model at large $N$, and

311: recall a method of large $N$ expansion introduced in \cite{KK}, which

312: involves expanding in rigid motions around the $SU(2)$ subgroup of

313: $SU(3)$.  In section 3 we proceed to the bound state approach that, by

314: introducing extra degrees of freedom, has $O(N^0)$ effect on baryon

315: spectra. In section 4 we review the status of $S=-1$ baryons

316: based on kaon-skyrmion bound states, and also study a near-threshold

317: D-wave resonance \cite{Scoc} that, upon

318: $SU(2)$ collective coordinate quantization,

319: reproduces the observed states $\Lambda(1520)$, $\Sigma(1670)$

320: and $\Sigma(1775)$ with good accuracy.

321: In section 5 we

322: carry out the search for $S=+1$ kaon-skyrmion bound states and

323: resonances.

324: In section 6 we attempt a different fit with a non-zero pion

325: mass. We offer some concluding remarks in section 7.

326: 

327: 

328: 

329: \sectiono{Three-flavor Skyrme model at large $N$}

330: 

331: The Skyrme approach to baryons begins with the Lagrangian \cite{Skyrme}

332: %

333: \beq

334: L_{Skyrme} = \frac{f^2_{\pi}}{16} {\rm Tr}(\partial_{\mu} U^{\dag}

335: \partial^{\mu} U)

336: +\frac{1}{32e^2}{\rm Tr}([\partial_{\mu} U U^{\dag},\partial_{\nu} U

337: U^{\dag}]^2)

338: +{\rm Tr}( M (U+U^{\dag}-2)) \, ,

339: \label{lskyrme}

340: \eeq

341: %

342: where $U(x^{\mu})$ is a matrix in $SU(3)$ and $M$ is proportional to

343: the matrix of quark masses.  Later on, it will be convenient to choose

344: units where $ef_{\pi}=1$.  There is an additional term in the action,

345: called the Wess-Zumino term:

346: %

347: \beq

348: S_{WZ} = -\frac{iN}{240\pi^2}\int d^5x

349: \epsilon^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta\gamma}

350: {\rm Tr}(\partial_{\mu} U U^{\dag}\partial_{\nu} U

351: U^{\dag}\partial_{\alpha} U U^{\dag}\partial_{\beta} U

352: U^{\dag}\partial_{\gamma} U U^{\dag})

353: \label{wz}.

354: \eeq

355: %

356: In the limit of unbroken $SU(3)$ flavor symmetry, its normalization

357:  is fixed by anomaly considerations \cite{WittenWZ}.

358: 

359: \smallskip

360: 

361: The Skyrme Lagrangian is a theory of mesons but it describes

362: baryons as well.  The simplest baryons in the Skyrme model are the

363: nucleons.  Classically, they have no strange quarks, so we may set the

364: kaon fluctuations to zero and consider only the $SU(2)$-isospin

365: subgroup of $SU(3)$.  Skyrme showed that there are topologically

366: stabilized static solutions of hedgehog form:

367: %

368: \beq

369: U_0 = U_{\pi,0} =\left(

370: \begin{array}{cc}

371: e^{i{ {\bf \tau} \cdot \hat{r}}F(r)} & 0\\

372: 0 & 1 \end{array}\right)

373: \label{hedgehog}

374: \eeq

375: %

376: in which the radial profile function $F(r)$ satisfies the boundary

377: conditions $F(0)=\pi, F(\infty)=0$.  By substituting the hedgehog

378: ansatz (\ref{hedgehog}) into the Skyrme Lagrangian (\ref{lskyrme}),

379: and considering the corresponding equations of motion one obtains an

380: equation for $F(r)$ which is straightforward to solve numerically.

381: The non-strange low-lying excitations of this soliton are given by

382: rigid rotations of the pion field $A(t) \in SU(2)$:

383: %

384: \beq

385: U(x,t)=A(t)U_0 A^{-1}(t).

386: \label{rot}

387: \eeq

388: %

389: For such an ansatz the Wess-Zumino term does not contribute.

390: By expanding the Lagrangian about $U_0$ and canonically quantizing the

391: rotations, one finds that the Hamiltonian is

392: %

393: \beq

394: H=M_{cl} + \frac{1}{2\Omega} J(J+1) \, ,

395: \eeq

396: %

397: where $J$ is the spin and the c-numbers $M_{cl}$ and $\Omega$ are

398: complicated integrals of functions of the soliton profile.

399: Numerically, for vanishing pion mass, one finds that

400: %

401: \beq

402: M_{cl} &\simeq& 36.5 \frac{f_{\pi}}{e}, \label{mcl}\\

403: \Omega &\simeq& \frac{107}{e^3 f_{\pi}} \, .\label{omega}

404: \eeq

405: %

406: For $N=2n+1$, the low-lying quantum numbers are independent of the

407: integer $n$.  The lowest states, with $I=J=\frac{1}{2}$ and

408: $I=J=\frac{3}{2}$, are

409: identified with the nucleon and $\Delta$ particles respectively. Since

410: $f_\pi\sim \sqrt{N}$, and $e\sim 1/\sqrt{N}$, the soliton mass is

411: $\sim N$, while the rotational splittings are $\sim 1/N$.  Adkins,

412: Nappi and Witten \cite{Adkins} found that they could fit the $N$ and

413: $\Delta$ masses with the parameter values $e=5.45, f_{\pi}=129$ MeV.

414: In comparison, the physical value of $f_{\pi}=186$ MeV.

415: 

416: \smallskip

417: 

418: A generalization of this rigid rotator treatment that produces $SU(3)$

419: multiplets of baryons is obtained by making the collective coordinate

420: $A(t)$ an element of $SU(3)$.  Then the WZ term makes a crucial

421: constraint on allowed multiplets \cite{Witten,Guad,Manohar,Chemtob,MNP}.

422: As discussed in the introduction, large $N$ treatment of this 3-flavor

423: Skyrme model is

424: more subtle than for its 2-flavor counterpart. When $N=2n+1$ is large,

425: even the lowest lying $(1,n)$ $SU(3)$ multiplet contains $(n+1)(n+3)$

426: states with strangeness ranging from $S=0$ to $S=-n-1$

427: \cite{IRK}. When the strange quark mass is turned on, it will

428: introduce a splitting of order $N$ between the lowest and highest

429: strangeness baryons in the same multiplet.  Thus, $SU(3)$ is badly

430: broken in the large $N$ limit, no matter how small $m_s$ is

431: \cite{IRK}.  We will find it helpful to think in terms of $SU(2)\times

432: U(1)$ flavor quantum numbers, which do have a smooth large $N$ limit.

433: In other words, we focus on low strangeness members of these

434: multiplets, whose $I$, $J$ quantum numbers do have a smooth large $N$

435: limit, and to try  identify them with observable baryons.

436: 

437: 

438: 

439: \smallskip

440: 

441: Since the multiplets contain baryons with up to $\sim N$ strange

442: quarks, the wave functions of baryon with fixed strangeness deviate

443: only an amount $\sim 1/N$ into the strange directions of the

444: collective coordinate space. Thus, to describe them, one may expand

445: the $SU(3)$ rigid rotator treatment around the $SU(2)$ collective

446: coordinate.  The small deviations from $SU(2)$ may be assembled into a

447: complex $SU(2)$ doublet $K(t)$.  This method of $1/N$ expansion was

448: implemented in \cite{KK}, and reviewed in \cite{IRK}.

449: 

450: \smallskip

451: 

452: {}From the point of view of the Skyrme model the ability to expand in

453: small fluctuations is due to the Wess-Zumino term which acts as a large

454: magnetic field of order $N$. The method works for arbitrary kaon mass,

455: and has the correct limit as $m_K\to 0$.  To order $O(N^0)$ the

456: Lagrangian has the form \cite{KK}

457: \begin{equation}

458: L = 4\Phi \dot K^\dagger \dot K + i {N\over 2} (K^\dagger \dot K - \dot

459: K^\dagger  K )

460: - \Gamma K^\dagger K \, .

461: \end{equation}

462: The Hamiltonian may be diagonalized:

463: \begin{equation}

464: H= \omega_- a^\dagger a +

465: \omega_+ b^\dagger b + {N\over 4\Phi}

466: \ ,

467: \end{equation}

468: where

469: \begin{equation}

470: \omega_\pm = {N\over 8\Phi} \left (\sqrt{1+ (m_K/M_0)^2} \pm 1 \right )

471: \ ,\qquad M_0^2 = {N^2\over 16 \Phi\Gamma }\ .

472: \end{equation}

473: The strangeness operator is $S= b^\dagger b - a^\dagger a$.  All the

474: non-exotic multiplets contain $a^\dagger$ excitations only. In the

475: $SU(3)$ limit, $\omega_-\to 0$, but $\omega_+ \to {N\over 4\Phi}\sim

476: N^0$.  Thus, the ``exoticness'' quantum number mentioned in \cite{DP}

477: is simply $E= b^\dagger b$ here, and the splitting between multiplets

478: of different ``exoticness'' is ${N\over 4\Phi}$, in agreement with

479: results found from the exact rigid rotator mass formula

480: (\ref{exactform}).

481: 

482: \smallskip

483: 

484: The rigid rotator prediction for $O(N^0)$ splittings are not exact,

485: however, for reasons explained long ago \cite{CK,KK,IRK} and reviewed

486: in the introduction. Even for non-exotic states, as the soliton

487: rotates into strange directions, it experiences deformation which

488: grows with $m_K$.  The bound state approach allows it to deform, which

489: has a significant $O(N^0)$ effect on energy levels. We now turn

490: to review the bound state approach.

491: 

492: \sectiono{Review of the Bound State Approach}

493: 

494: Another approach to strange baryons, which proves to be quite

495: successful in describing the light hyperons, is the so-called bound

496: state method \cite{CK}.  The basic strategy involved is to expand the

497: action to second order in kaon fluctuations about the classical

498: hedgehog soliton.  Then one can obtain a linear differential equation

499: for the kaon field, incorporating the effect of the kaon mass, which

500: one can solve exactly.  The eigenenergies of the kaon field are then

501: precisely the differences between the Skyrmion mass and the strange

502: baryons.  In order to implement this strategy, it is convenient to

503: write $U$ in the form

504: %

505: \beq

506: U=\sqrt{U_{\pi}} U_K \sqrt{U_{\pi}} \, ,

507: \label{uform}

508: \eeq

509: %

510: where $U_{\pi}=\exp[2i\lambda_j \pi^j/f_{\pi}]$ and

511: $U_K=\exp[2i\lambda_a K^a/f_{\pi}]$ with $j$ running from 1 to 3 and

512: $a$ running from 4 to 7.\footnote{There is actually a second coupling

513: constant $f_K$ which replaces $f_\pi$ in the definition of $U_K$;

514: experimentally, $f_K\sim 1.22f_\pi$.  To incorporate the difference

515: between these coupling constants, one simply replaces $f_\pi$ by $f_K$

516: when expanding in powers of the kaon field, but does not rescale the

517: kinetic and kaon mass terms, which are required to have standard

518: normalization.  Then those terms that follow from the four-derivative

519: term, the Wess-Zumino term, and the pion mass in the Skyrme Lagrangian

520: change by a factor of $(f_\pi/f_K)^2$.}  The $\lambda_a$ are the

521: standard $SU(3)$ Gell-Mann matrices.  We will collect the $K^a$ into a

522: complex isodoublet $K$:

523: %

524: \beq

525: K=

526: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(

527: \begin{array}{c}

528: K^4-iK^5 \\

529: K^6-iK^7

530: \end{array} \right)=

531: \left(

532: \begin{array}{c}

533: K^+ \\K^0

534: \end{array} \right).

535: \label{kdoublet}

536: \eeq

537: Though the Wess-Zumino term can only be written as an action term, if

538: we expand it to second order in $K$, we obtain an ordinary Lagrangian

539: term:

540: %

541: \beq

542: L_{WZ} = \frac{iN}{f_{\pi}^2}B^{\mu} \left( K^{\dag}

543: D_{\mu}K-(D_{\mu}K)

544: ^{\dag}K \right)

545: \eeq

546: %

547: where

548: %

549: \beq

550: D_{\mu}K=

551: \partial_{\mu}K+\frac12\left(\sqrt{U_{\pi}^{\dag}}

552: \partial_{\mu}\sqrt{U_{\pi}}+\sqrt{U_{\pi}}

553: \partial_{\mu}\sqrt{U_{\pi}^{\dag}}\right)K \, ,

554: \eeq

555: %

556: and $B_\mu$ is the baryon number current. Now we decompose

557: the kaon field into a set of partial waves.  Because

558: the background soliton field is invariant under combined spatial and

559: isospin rotations ${\bf T} = {\bf I}+{\bf L}$, a good set of quantum

560: numbers is $T,L$ and $T_z$, and so we write the kaon eigenmodes as

561: %

562: \beq

563: K=k(r,t) Y_{TLT_z} \, .

564: \eeq

565: %

566: Substituting this expression into $L_{Skyrme}+L_{WZ}$ we obtain an

567: effective Lagrangian for the radial kaon field $k(r,t)$:

568: %

569: \beq \nonumber

570: L=4\pi \int r^2 dr\left( f(r)\dot{k}^{\dag}

571: \dot{k}+i\lambda(r)(k^{\dag}\dot{k}-\dot{k}^{\dag}k)-h(r)\frac{d}{dr}k^{\dag}

572: \frac{d}{dr}k -k^{\dag}k(m_K^2+V_{eff}(r)) \right) \, ,

573: \eeq

574: %

575: with $\lambda(r) = -\frac{N e^2}{2\pi^2 r^2}F'\sin^2 F$,

576: $f(r)=1+2s(r)+d(r),h(r)=1+2s(r), d(r)=F'^2, s(r)=(\sin F/r)^2,

577: c(r)=\sin^2\frac{F}{2}$, and

578: %

579: \beq

580: V_{eff}=-\frac14(d+2s)-2s(s+2d)+\frac{1+d+s}{r^2}(L(L+1)+2c^2+4c{\bf

581: I\cdot L})

582: \\+\frac{6}{r^2}\left(s(c^2+2c{\bf I\cdot L}-{\bf I\cdot

583: L})+\frac{d}{dr}\left((c+{\bf I\cdot L})F'\sin

584: F\right)\right)-\frac{m_{\pi}^2}{2}(1-\cos F) \, . \nonumber

585: \label{veff}

586: \eeq

587: %

588: The resulting equation of motion for $k$ is

589: %

590: \beq

591: -f(r)\ddot{k} +2i\lambda(r)\dot{k}+{\cal O} k=0\, , \\

592: {\cal O} \equiv \frac{1}{r^2}\partial_r

593: h(r)r^2\partial_r-m_K^2-V_{eff}(r)\, . \nonumber

594: \eeq

595: %

596: Expanding $k$ in terms of its eigenmodes gives

597: %

598: \beq

599: k(r,t)=\sum_{n>0}(\tilde{k}_n(r)e^{i\tilde{\omega}_nt}b_n^{\dag}+k_n(r)e^{i\omega_nt}a_n)\,

600: ,

601: \eeq

602: %

603: with $\omega_n,\tilde{\omega}_n$ positive.  The eigenvalue equations are

604: thus

605: %

606: \beq

607: (f(r)\omega_n^2+2\lambda(r)\omega_n+{\cal O} )k_n&=&{ 0} \qquad(S=-1)\,

608: ,\nonumber \\

609: (f(r)\tilde{\omega}_n^2-2\lambda(r)\tilde{\omega}_n+{\cal

610: O})\tilde{k}_n&=&

611: { 0}

612: \qquad (S=+1)\, .

613: \label{keqns}

614: \eeq

615: %

616: Crucially, the sign in front of $\lambda$, which is the contribution

617: of the WZ term, depends on whether the relevant eigenmodes have

618: positive or negative strangeness.  The important result here is the

619: set of equations (\ref{keqns}) which we will now solve and whose

620: solutions we will match with the spectrum of baryons.

621: 

622: \smallskip

623: 

624: It is possible to examine these equations analytically for $m_K=0$.

625: The $S=-1$ equation has an exact solution with $\omega=0$ and

626: $k(r)\sim \sin (F(r)/2)$. This is how the rigid rotator zero mode is

627: recovered in the bound state treatment \cite{CHK}. As $m_K$

628: is turned on, this solution turns into an actual bound state

629: \cite{CK,CHK}. One the other

630: hand, the $S=+1$ equation does {\it not} have a solution with $\tilde

631: {\omega} ={N\over 4\Phi}$ and $k(r)\sim \sin (F(r)/2)$. This is why the

632: exotic rigid rotator state is not reproduced by the more precise bound

633: state approach to strangeness. In section 5 we further check

634: that, for small $m_K$, there is no resonance that would turn into

635: the rotator state of energy ${N\over 4\Phi}$ in the $SU(3)$ limit.

636: 

637: \sectiono{Baryons with $S=-1$}

638: 

639: In this section we recall the description of $S=-1$ baryons as

640: antikaon--skyrmion bound states or resonances.  We will set the kaon

641: mass equal to its physical value, $m_K=495$ MeV, but set the pion mass

642: equal to zero.  If we wish to fit both the nucleon and delta masses to

643: their physical values using the $SU(2)$ rotator approximation, then we

644: must take $e=5.45$ and $f_{\pi}=129$ MeV; let us begin with these

645: values as they are somewhat traditional in analyses based on the

646: Skyrme model.

647: 

648: \smallskip

649: 

650: The lightest strange excitation is in the channel $L$=1,

651: $T=\frac{1}{2}$, and

652: its mass is $M_{cl}+0.218\, ef_{\pi} \simeq 1019$ MeV.

653: As the lightest state

654: with $S=-1$, it is natural to identify it with the $\Lambda(1115)$,

655: $\Sigma(1190)$, and $\Sigma(1385)$ states, where the additional

656: splitting arises from $SU(2)$ rotator corrections.  Let us compute

657: these corrections.  The relevant formula for $S=-1$ \cite{CHK} is

658: %

659: \beq  \label{relevant}

660: M=M_{cl}+\omega_1+\frac{1}{2\Omega}\left[cJ(J+1)+(1-c)I(I+1)+\frac34

661: (c^2-c)\right]\, ,

662: \eeq

663: %

664: where $\omega_1$ is the kaon eigenenergy and $c$ is a number defined

665: in terms of the bound state eigenfunction $k_1$ by

666: %

667: \beq

668: c_{l=1}=1-\omega_1\frac{\int dr k_1^* k_1 \left(\frac43

669: fr^2\cos^2\frac{F}{2}-2(\frac{d}{dr}(r^2F'\sin F)-\frac43 \sin^2 F

670: \cos^2 \frac{F}{2}) \right)}{\int r^2 dr k_1^* k_1(f\omega_1+\lambda)}\,

671: .

672: \eeq

673: %

674: In this $L=1$, $T=\frac{1}{2}$ channel, we find from numerical

675: integration that

676: $c=0.617$.  The masses, including $SU(2)$ corrections, appear in

677: columns (a) of Table 1.  The two features to note here are that first,

678: these states are all somewhat

679: overbound, and second, the $SU(2)$ splittings match rather closely

680: with experiment (one of the successes of the bound state approach

681: \cite{CHK}).

682: %

683: \begin{table}

684: \begin{center}

685: \begin{tabular}{||r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r||} \hline

686: Particle& $J$& $I$& $L$& Mass (expt)& Mass (a)& Mass (b)& Mass (c)\\

687: \hline\hline

688: $\Lambda $& $\frac{1}{2}$ & 0& 1& 1115& 1048& 1059& 1121\\ \hline

689: $\Sigma   $& $\frac{1}{2}$& 1& 1& 1190& 1122& 1143& 1289\\ \hline

690: $\Sigma$& $\frac{3}{2}$& 1& 1& 1385& 1303& 1309& 1330\\ \hline

691: $\Lambda$& $\frac{1}{2}$& 0& 0& 1405& 1281& 1346& 1366\\ \hline

692: \end{tabular}

693: \end{center}

694: \caption{Masses (in MeV) of the light $S=-1$ hyperons as calculated from

695: the bound state approach, with (a) $e=5.45$, $f_\pi=f_K=129$ MeV, (b)

696: $e=4.82$, $f_\pi=f_K=186$ MeV, with an overall constant added to fit the

697: $N$ and $\Delta$ masses, and (c) the same parameters as (a) but with the

698: WZ term artificially decreased by a factor of 0.4.  In all cases

699: $m_\pi=0$.}

700: \end{table}

701: 

702: \smallskip

703: 

704: The next group of strange excitations is in the channel

705: $L=0$, $T=\frac{1}{2}$,

706: and we have determined its mass before including rotator corrections to

707: be

708: $M_{cl}+0.523 \, ef_{\pi}\simeq 1233$ MeV.

709: In this channel the formula for $c$ is given by

710: %

711: \beq

712: c_{l=0}=1-\omega_2\frac{\int dr k_2^* k_2 \left(\frac43

713: fr^2\sin^2\frac{F}{2}+2(\frac{d}{dr}(r^2F'\sin F)+\frac43 \sin^2 F

714: \sin^2 \frac{F}{2}) \right)}{\int r^2 dr k_2^* k_2(f\omega_2+\lambda)}

715:  \, ,

716: \eeq

717: %

718: and for the relevant bound state this gives $c\sim 0.806$.  The

719: $SU(2)$ corrections (\ref{relevant})

720: raise the mass of the lightest state in this

721: channel to 1281 MeV.  From the quantum numbers, it is natural to

722: identify this state with the $\Lambda(1405)$ state, but as we see it

723: is rather overbound.

724: 

725: \smallskip

726: 

727: We have seen that with the traditional values $e=5.45$ and

728: $f_{\pi}=129$ MeV the Skyrme model successfully captures qualitative

729: features of the baryon spectrum such as the presence of the

730: $\Lambda(1405)$ state, but that the bound states are all too light.

731: It is possible that the zero-point energy of

732: kaon fluctuations,  which is hard to calculate explicitly,

733: has to be added to all masses.  Thus it is easiest to

734: focus on mass splittings. Then from the $SU(2)$ rotator

735: quantization, we would obtain only one constraint (\ref{omega}), from

736: the nucleon-$\Delta$ splitting, and be able to adjust $e$ and

737: $f_{\pi}$ to improve the fit to known masses.  As we increase

738: $f_{\pi}$, we find that the particle masses increase, improving

739: agreement with experiment.  For definiteness, let us try to set

740: $f_{\pi}$ to its experimental value, $f_{\pi}$=186 MeV, which then

741: requires $e=4.82$.  We report the results for the masses in column (b)

742: of Table 1.

743: 

744: \smallskip

745: 

746: More dramatic increases in the particle masses may be obtained by

747: distinguishing between the pion decay constant $f_{\pi}$ and the kaon

748: decay constant $f_K$, as shown by Rho, Riska and Scoccola \cite{Rho},

749: who worked in a modified Skyrme model with explicit vector

750: mesons \cite{vector}.  For

751: $f_K=1.22\,f_{\pi}$ they were able to essentially eliminate the

752: over-binding problem for the $L=1$, $T=\frac{1}{2}$ states, though they

753: still

754: found the analogue of the $\Lambda(1405)$ state to be overbound by

755: about 100 MeV. We should add that the natural appearance of this

756: $\Lambda(1405)$ with negative parity is a major success of the

757: bound state approach \cite{CHK, Gobbi}.

758: In  quark or bag models such a baryon is described

759: by a $p$-wave quark excitation, which typically turns out

760: to be too heavy (for a discussion, see the introduction of

761: \cite{Gobbi}).

762: 

763: 

764: \begin{figure}[htbp]

765: \centering

766: \epsfig{file=dwave.eps, width=4in}

767: \caption{Phase shift as a function of energy in the

768: $L=2$, $T=\frac{3}{2}$, $S=-1$ channel.

769: The energy $\omega$ is measured in units of $ef_\pi$ (with the kaon mass

770: subtracted, so that $\omega=0$ at threshold), and

771: the phase shift $\delta$ is measured in radians.  Here $e=5.45$ and

772: $f_\pi=129$ MeV.}

773: \label{dwavefig}

774: \end{figure}

775: 

776: \smallskip

777: 

778: A third way to raise the masses of the $\Lambda$ and $\Sigma$

779: states is to modify the Wess-Zumino term.  For the $S=-1$ states,

780: the WZ term results in an attractive force between the Skyrmion

781: and the kaon, so if we reduce this term by hand, the hyperons will

782: become less tightly bound and their masses should

783: increase.\footnote{Note that

784: for unbroken $SU(3)$ the WZ term is quantized and

785: cannot be changed by hand. However, $SU(3)$ breaking is likely to

786: change the WZ term.} We will address this approach in the next

787: section, and we will see that such a reduction helps to produce an

788: $S=+1$ near-threshold state. However, too great a reduction of the WZ

789: term

790: will spoil the hyperfine splittings governed by the parameter $c$.

791: 

792: 

793: 

794: \smallskip

795: \begin{table}

796: \begin{center}

797: \begin{tabular}{||r|r|r|r|r|r||} \hline

798: Particle& $J$& $I$& $L$& Mass (expt) & Mass (th) \\ \hline\hline

799: $\Lambda \; \; (D_{03})$ & $\frac{3}{2}$ & 0& 2& 1520& 1462\\ \hline

800: $\Sigma \; \; (D_{13})$& $\frac{3}{2}$ & 1& 2& 1670& 1613\\ \hline

801: $\Sigma \; \; (D_{15})$& $\frac{5}{2}$ & 1& 2& 1775& 1723\\ \hline

802: \end{tabular}

803: \end{center}

804: \caption{Masses (in MeV) of the $S=-1$ $D$-wave resonances calculated

805: from the bound state approach, with $f_\pi = 129 $ MeV, $e = 5.45$. }

806: \end{table}

807: %

808: 

809: Finally, let us note that the philosophy of the bound state approach

810: can be applied successfully to states above threshold.  Such states

811: will appear as resonances in kaon-nucleon scattering, which we may

812: identify by the standard procedure of solving the appropriate kaon

813: wave equation and studying the phase shifts of the corresponding

814: solutions as a function of the kaon energy. In the $L=2$,

815: $T=\frac{3}{2}$ channel there is a resonance at $M_{cl}+0.7484 \,

816: ef_{\pi}$=1392

817: MeV (see Figure 1)\footnote{The existence of

818: this resonance was noted long ago in a

819: vector-meson stabilized Skyrme model~\cite{Scoc}.}.

820: In this channel, the $SU(2)$

821: splitting parameter $c$ is given by the formula \cite{Blom}

822: \beq

823:  \nonumber

824: c_{l=2}=1-\omega_3\frac{\int dr k_3^* k_3 \left(\frac23(1+\frac45

825: \cos^2\frac{F}{2})

826: fr^2-\frac{4}{5}(\frac{d}{dr}(r^2F'\sin F)+\frac43 \sin^2 F

827: \sin^2 \frac{F}{2}) \right)}{\int r^2 dr k_3^* k_3(f\omega_3+\lambda)}

828: \,.

829: \eeq

830: Numerically, we evaluate this coefficient by cutting off

831: the radial integral around the point where $k(r)$ begins to oscillate.

832: We find  $c \sim 0.23$.  The states are split into the channels with

833: $(I, J)$

834: given by  $(0, \frac{3}{2})$, $(1, \frac{3}{2})$,

835: $(1, \frac{5}{2})$ \cite{Scoc},

836:  with masses 1462 MeV, 1613

837: MeV, and 1723 MeV respectively (see Table 2).

838: We see that these correspond nicely to the known negative

839: parity resonances $\Lambda(1520)$ (which is $D_{03}$ in standard

840: notation),

841: $\Sigma(1670)$ (which is $D_{13}$) and

842: $\Sigma( 1775)$ (which is $D_{15}$) \cite{PDG}.

843: As with the bound states, we find that the resonances are

844: somewhat overbound (the overbinding of all states is presumably

845: related to the necessity of adding an overall zero-point energy

846: of kaon fluctuations), but

847: that the mass splittings within this multiplet are accurate to within a

848: few percent. In fact, we find that the ratio

849: \beq

850: {M(1, \frac{5}{2})- M(0, \frac{3}{2})\over

851: M(1, \frac{3}{2}) - M(0, \frac{3}{2})}

852: \approx 1.73

853: \ ,

854: \eeq

855: while its empirical value is $1.70$.

856: 

857: 

858: \smallskip

859: 

860: This very good agreement with the states observed above the $K-N$

861: threshold is an additional success of the kaon fluctuation approach to

862: strange baryons.

863: 

864: 

865: 

866: 

867: \section{A Baryon with S=+1?}

868: 

869: For states with positive strangeness, the eigenvalue equation for the

870: kaon field is the same except for a change of sign in the contribution

871: of the WZ term.  This sign change makes the WZ term repulsive for

872: states with $\bar{s}$ quarks and introduces a splitting between

873: ordinary and exotic baryons \cite {CK}.  In fact, with standard values

874: of the parameters (such as those in the previous section) the

875: repulsion is strong enough to remove {\em all} bound states and

876: resonances with $S=1$, including the newly-observed

877: $\Theta^+$.  It is natural to ask how much we must modify the Skyrme

878: model to accommodate the pentaquark.  The simplest modification we can

879: make is to introduce a coefficient $a$ multiplying the WZ term.

880: Qualitatively, we expect that reducing the WZ term will make the

881: $S=+1$ baryons more bound, while the opposite should happen to the

882: ordinary baryons.  Another modification we will attempt is to vary the

883: mass of the kaon; we will find that for sufficiently large kaon mass

884: the $\Theta^+$ becomes stable.  In all cases, we have found

885: empirically that raising $f_K$ relative to $f_\pi$ makes the

886: pentaquark less bound, so for this section we will take $f_K=f_\pi$.

887: 

888: \smallskip

889: 

890: The most likely channel in which we might find an exotic has the

891: quantum numbers $L=1$, $T=\frac{1}{2}$,

892: as in this case the effective

893: potential is least repulsive near the origin.  For $f_{\pi}$= 129,

894: 186, and 225 MeV, with $e^3f_{\pi}$ fixed, we have studied the effect

895: of lowering the WZ term by hand.  Interestingly, in all three cases we

896: have to set $a\simeq 0.39$ to have a bound state at threshold.  If we

897: raise $a$ slightly, this bound state moves above the threshold, but does

898: not

899: survive far above threshold; it ceases to be a sharp state for $a\simeq

900: 0.46$.  We have plotted phase shifts for various values of $a$ in Figure

901: 2.\footnote{When the state is above the threshold, we do not

902: find a full $\pi$ variation of the phase. Furthermore,

903: the variation and slope of the phase shift

904: decrease rapidly as the state moves higher, so it

905: gets too broad to be identifiable. So, the state can only exist as a

906: bound

907: state or a near-threshold state.

908: }

909: With $a=0.39$ and $f_\pi=129$ MeV, this state (with mass essentially at

910: threshold) has $SU(2)$ splitting parameter $c\sim -0.48$. The $SU(2)$

911: collective coordinate

912: quantization of the state proceeds analogously to that of the $S=-1$

913: bound states, and the mass formula is again of the form

914: (\ref{relevant}).

915:   Thus the lightest $S=+1$ state we find has $I = 0$, $J = \frac{1}{2}$

916: and positive parity, {\it i.e.} it is an $S= +1$ counterpart of the

917: $\Lambda$.

918: This is our candidate $\Theta^+$ state.

919: Its first $SU(2)$ rotator excitations have $I =1$, $J^P = \frac{3}{2}^+$

920: and $I =1$, $J^P = \frac{1}{2}^+$ (a relation of these

921: states to $\Theta^+$ also follows from

922: general large $N$ relations among baryons \cite{Lebed}).

923: The counterparts of these

924: $J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+, \frac{3}{2}^+$

925: states in the rigid rotator quantization lie in the {\bf 27}-plets of

926: $SU(3)$.

927: These states were recently discussed in

928: \cite{Walliser, Kobushkin}.

929: 

930: From the mass formula (\ref{relevant}) we deduce that

931: \begin{equation}

932: M(1, \frac{1}{2})- M(0, \frac{1}{2}) ={1\over \Omega}(1-c)

933: \ ,\qquad

934: M(1, \frac{3}{2})- M(0, \frac{1}{2}) ={1\over \Omega}

935: \left (1+{c\over 2}\right )\ .

936: \end{equation}

937: Since $c < 0$, the $J = \frac{3}{2}$ state

938: is lighter than $J = \frac{1}{2}$.

939:  Using $c\sim -0.48$, we find

940: that the $I=1$, $J^P = \frac{3}{2}^+$ state is $\sim 148$ MeV

941: heavier than the $\Theta^+$,\footnote{This value is close

942: to those predicted in \cite{Walliser} but is significantly higher

943: than the $55$ MeV reported in \cite{Kobushkin}. For a comparison of

944: these possibilities with available data, see

945: \cite{Jennings}.}

946: while the $I =1$, $J^P = \frac{1}{2}^+$

947: state is $\sim 289$ MeV

948: heavier than the $\Theta^+$.

949: %Perhaps these states may be detectable

950: %experimentally via their decays into a pion and a $\Theta^+$.

951: 

952: We may further consider $I=2$ rotator excitations which have

953: $J^P= \frac{3}{2}^+, \frac{5}{2}^+$.

954: Such states are allowed for $N=3$ (in the quark

955: language the charge $+3$ state, for example, is given by

956: $uuuu{\bar s}$).

957: The counterparts of these

958: $J^P=\frac{3}{2}^+, \frac{5}{2}^+$

959: states in the rigid rotator quantization lie in the {\bf 35}-plets of

960: $SU(3)$ \cite{Walliser, Kobushkin}.

961: From the mass formula (\ref{relevant}) we deduce that

962: \beq

963: & M(2, \frac{5}{2})- M(0, \frac{1}{2}) ={1\over \Omega}(3+c)\sim 494

964: \ {\rm MeV}\ ,\\

965: & M(2, \frac{3}{2})- M(0, \frac{1}{2}) ={3\over \Omega}

966: \left (1-{c\over 2}\right )\sim 729\ {\rm MeV}\ . \nonumber

967: \eeq

968: 

969: While the value of $c$ certainly depends on

970: the details of the chiral lagrangian, we may form certain combinations

971: of masses of the exotics from which it cancels. In this way we find

972: ``model-independent relations'' which rely only the existence of

973: the $SU(2)$ collective coordinate:

974: \beq \label{modelin}

975: 2 M(1, \frac{3}{2}) + M(1, \frac{1}{2})- 3 M(0, \frac{1}{2})

976: & =&

977: 2(M_\Delta- M_N)=586\ {\rm MeV} \ \nonumber ,\\

978: \frac{3}{2} M(2, \frac{5}{2}) + M(2, \frac{3}{2})- \frac{5}{2}

979: M(0, \frac{1}{2}) & =& 5(M_\Delta- M_N)= 1465\ {\rm MeV}\ ,  \\

980:      M(2,\frac{3}{2}) - M(2,\frac{5}{2}) & =& \frac{5}{3} \left(

981: M(1,\frac{1}{2})-  M(1,\frac{3}{2}) \right) , 

982: \nonumber 

983: \eeq

984: %

985: where we used $M_\Delta-M_N=\frac{3}{2\Omega}$. These relations

986: are analogous to the sum rule \cite{CK} \beq 2 M_{\Sigma^*} +

987: M_\Sigma- 3 M_\Lambda= 2(M_\Delta- M_N) \ , \eeq which is obeyed

988: with good accuracy. If the $I=1,2$ exotic baryons are discovered,

989: it will be very interesting to compare the relations

990: (\ref{modelin}) with experiment.

991: \smallskip

992: 

993: \begin{figure}[htbp]

994: \centering

995: \epsfig{file=wzplot.eps, width=6in}

996: \caption{Phase shifts $\delta$ as a function of energy

997: in the $S=+1$, $L=1$, $T=\frac{1}{2}$ channel, for

998: various choices of the parameter $a$ (strength of the WZ term).

999:  The energy $\omega$ is measured in units of $ef_\pi$ ($e=5.45$,

1000: $f_\pi=f_K= 129$ MeV) and

1001: the phase shift $\delta$ is measured in radians. $\omega =0$

1002: corresponds to the $K-N$ threshold.}

1003: \label{wzplot}

1004: \end{figure}

1005: 

1006: 

1007: \begin{figure}[htbp]

1008: \centering

1009: \epsfig{file=mkplot.eps, width=6in}

1010: \caption{Phase shifts $\delta$ as a function of energy

1011: in the $S=+1$, $L=1$, $T=\frac{1}{2}$ channel,

1012: for various values of $m_K$.

1013: Here $e=5.45$ and $f_\pi=f_K=129$ MeV.}

1014: \label{mkplot}

1015: \end{figure}

1016: Suppose we tried to require the existence of a pentaquark state by

1017: setting $a$=0.4.  How would this change affect the spectrum of

1018: negative strangeness baryons?  The results are somewhat mixed.  Let us

1019: take $f_{\pi}$=129 MeV as an example.  In the $L=1,T=\frac{1}{2}$

1020: channel,

1021: the

1022: bound state has a mass of 1209 MeV before including $SU(2)$ rotator

1023: corrections.  The parameter $c$ which characterizes the $SU(2)$

1024: splittings falls to $c \sim 0.14$.  Including the splittings we find

1025: the masses given in column (c) of Table 1.  Notice that the $\Sigma$

1026: is far above its experimental mass of 1190 MeV, signaling drastic

1027: disagreement with the Gell-Mann-Okubo relations, as we would expect

1028: for this small value of $c$.  In the $L=0,T=\frac{1}{2}$ channel the

1029: $\Lambda$ resonance is at 1366 MeV (including rotator corrections),

1030: still somewhat overbound.

1031: 

1032: \smallskip

1033: 

1034: As another probe of the parameter space of our Skyrme model, let us

1035: vary the mass of the kaon and see how this affects the pentaquark.  As

1036: observed in Section 3, in the limit of infinitesimal kaon mass, there

1037: is no resonance in the $S=+1, L=1, T=\frac{1}{2}$ channel.  We find

1038: that to obtain a bound state in this channel, we must raise $m_K$ to

1039: about 1100 MeV.\footnote{Since both $D$ and $B$ mesons are much

1040: heavier than this, we may infer following \cite{Riska} that there

1041: exist exotic bound state baryons which, in the quark model language,

1042: are pentaquarks containing an anti-charm or an anti-bottom quark

1043: (provided that the associated meson decay constants $f_D$ and $f_B$

1044: are not too large). This prediction is rather insensitive to the

1045: details of the chiral lagrangian \cite{Riska}. See also \cite{oh}

1046: for a more careful analysis of these exotics that incorporates

1047: heavy quark symmetry.}  Plots of the phase

1048: shift vs. energy for different values of $m_K$ are presented in Figure

1049: 3. This figure clearly shows that increasing $SU(3)$ breaking leads to

1050: increasing variation of the scattering phase.

1051: %Notice howevever

1052: %that one obtains a true resonance (phase shift $\sim \pi$)

1053: %for values of $m_K$

1054: 

1055: 

1056: \section{Fits with Massive Pion}

1057: 

1058: One interesting way to extend the model is to include the mass of the

1059: pion, as first explored by Adkins and Nappi \cite{an}.

1060: We find that this actually improves matters for the pentaquark.

1061: The basic procedure is simply to take $m_{\pi}=138$ MeV; there will be

1062: a modification in the kaon effective potential and also a change in

1063: the variational equation for the Skyrmion profile function $F(r)$.  As

1064: a result, the constraints on $e$ and $f_{\pi}$ change:

1065: %

1066: \beq

1067: M_{cl} &\simeq& 38.7 \frac{f_{\pi}}{e}, \label{mclpi}\\

1068: \Omega &\simeq& \frac{62.9}{e^3 f_{\pi}}.\label{omegapi}

1069: \eeq

1070: %

1071: Adkins and Nappi found that the best fit to the nucleon and delta masses

1072: was given by $e=4.84$ and $f_{\pi}=108$ MeV.  In dimensionless units,

1073: $m_{\pi}=.263$.

1074: 

1075: \smallskip

1076: 

1077: For the $S=-1$ baryons, we find a bound state in the $L=1$,

1078: $T=\frac{1}{2}$ channel with mass 1012 MeV.  The $SU(2)$ rotator

1079: parameter is $c_{l=1}\sim 0.51$, giving a mass spectrum of 1031, 1126,

1080: and 1276 MeV.  In the $L=0$, $T=\frac{1}{2}$ sector there is a bound

1081: state with mass 1204 MeV which is increased by rotator corrections

1082: ($c\sim 0.82$) to give a state with mass 1253 MeV corresponding

1083: to $\Lambda(1405)$.

1084: Furthermore, in the $L=2$, $T=\frac{3}{2}$ channel

1085: there is a bound state slightly below the threshold

1086: \cite{Blom} (in the massless

1087: pion fit this state was a resonance slightly above the

1088: threshold). While these

1089: states are all overbound, one can presumably improve the fit by

1090: adjusting parameters as in the previous sections.

1091: 

1092: \smallskip

1093: 

1094: Let us first note that with the massive pion fit, the pentaquark

1095: appears with a smaller adjustment in parameters.  In the $L=1$,

1096: $T=\frac{1}{2}$,

1097: $S=+1$ channel, there is a bound state for $a \sim 0.69$. Let us study

1098: the effect of setting $a=0.75$ on the bound states.  With this change,

1099: the bound state energies for negative strangeness baryons rise.  In

1100: the $L=1$, $T=\frac{1}{2}$

1101: channel, the mass is 1114 MeV, and $c_{l=1}\sim

1102: 0.35$, giving masses of 1050, 1177 and 1279 MeV for the

1103: $\Lambda,\Sigma,\Sigma$ states.  $c_{l=1}$ is smaller than its

1104: experimental value of 0.62 but is not disastrously small, and the

1105: overall masses have increased towards their experimental values.  In

1106: the $L=0, T=\frac{1}{2}$ channel,

1107: the $\Lambda$ state also increases to 1283

1108: MeV (including rotator corrections.)

1109: %

1110: \begin{table}

1111: \begin{center}

1112: \begin{tabular}{||r|r|r|r|r|r|r||} \hline

1113: Particle& $J$& $I$& $L$& Mass (expt)& Mass (d)& Mass (e)\\ \hline\hline

1114: $\Lambda $& $\frac{1}{2}$ & 0& 1& 1115& 1031& 1050\\ \hline

1115: $\Sigma  $& $\frac{1}{2}$& 1& 1& 1190& 1126& 1177\\ \hline

1116: $\Sigma$& $\frac{3}{2}$ & 1& 1& 1385& 1276& 1279\\ \hline

1117: $\Lambda$& $\frac{1}{2}$ & 0& 0& 1405& 1253& 1283\\ \hline

1118: \end{tabular}

1119: \end{center}

1120: \caption{Masses (in MeV) of the light $S=-1$ hyperons as calculated from

1121: the bound state approach, with $e=4.84$, $f_\pi=f_K=108$ MeV, and

1122: $m_\pi=138$ MeV.  Column (d) reports the masses with the usual WZ term;

1123: in column (d) the WZ term has been artificially reduced by a factor

1124: 0.75.}

1125: \end{table}

1126: %

1127: One further interesting result is that the pentaquark seems more

1128: sensitive to the mass of the kaon with $m_\pi=138$ MeV; the pentaquark

1129: actually becomes bound for $m_K=700$ MeV.

1130: 

1131: \smallskip

1132: 

1133: It is also possible to vary the pion mass; for masses around 200 MeV the

1134: bound state can appear for $S$=1 with $a\sim 0.8$.

1135: 

1136: 

1137: \section{Discussion}

1138: 

1139: There are several implications of the analysis carried

1140: out in the preceding sections. First of all, we have to admit that the

1141: bound state approach to the Skyrme model could not have been used to

1142: predict

1143: the existence of an exotic $S=+1$ baryon. Indeed, for typical parameter

1144: choices we find neither kaon-Skyrmion bound states nor resonances with

1145: $S=+1$,

1146: confirming earlier results from the 80's \cite{CHK,Scoc,IRK}.

1147: At the time these results appeared consistent with the apparent absence

1148: of

1149: such exotic resonances in kaon scattering data.\footnote{In fact, the

1150: experimental situation is still somewhat confused (see

1151: \cite{Nussinov,Arndt,Casher,Krein} for discussions of remaining

1152: puzzles).}

1153: 

1154: \smallskip

1155: 

1156: We have found, however, that by a relatively large adjustment of

1157: parameters in the minimal bound state lagrangian, such as reduction of

1158: the WZ term to $0.4$ of its $SU(3)$ value, the near-threshold $S=+1$

1159: kaon state can be made to appear. In this case, however, the agreement

1160: of the model with the conventional strange baryons is worsened

1161: somewhat. A better strategy may be to vary more parameters in the

1162: Lagrangian, and perhaps to include other terms; then there is hope

1163: that properties of both exotic and conventional baryons will be

1164: reproduced nicely.  This would be a good project for the future.

1165: 

1166: \smallskip

1167: 

1168: Finally, our work sheds new light on connections between the bound

1169: state and the rigid rotator approaches to strange baryons. These

1170: connections were explored in the 80's, and it was shown that the bound

1171: state approach matches nicely to 3-flavor rigid rotator quantization

1172: carried out for large $N$ \cite{CHK,KK,IRK}. The key observation is

1173: that, in both approaches, the deviations into strange directions

1174: become small in the large $N$ limit due to the WZ term acting as a

1175: large magnetic field. Thus, for baryons whose strangeness is of order

1176: $1$, the harmonic approximation is good for any value of $m_K$. The

1177: $S=-1$ bound state mode smoothly turns into the rotator zero-mode in

1178: the limit $m_K\to 0$, which shows explicitly that rotator modes can be

1179: found in the small fluctuation analysis around the $SU(2)$ skyrmion.

1180: However, for small $m_K$ there is no fluctuation mode corresponding to

1181: exotic $S=+1$ rigid rotator excitations. In our opinion, this confirms

1182: the seriousness of questions raised about such rotator states for

1183: large $N$ \cite{KK,IRK,Cohen}.

1184: 

1185: 

1186: \smallskip

1187: If the large $N$ expansion is valid, then we conclude that the exotic

1188: baryon appears in the spectrum only for sufficiently large $SU(3)$

1189: breaking. The simplest way to parametrize this breaking is to increase

1190: $m_K$ while keeping coefficients of all other terms fixed at their

1191: $SU(3)$ values. Then we find that the resonance appears at a value of

1192: $m_K \sim 1 GeV$. However in reality $SU(3)$ breaking will also affect

1193: other coefficients, in particular it may reduce somewhat the strength

1194: of the WZ term, thus helping the formation of the resonance. In

1195: principle the coefficients in the chiral lagrangian should be fitted

1196: from experiment, and also higher derivative terms may need to be

1197: included.

1198: 

1199: \smallskip

1200: 

1201: What does our work imply about the status of the $\Theta^+$ baryon in

1202: the real world? As usual, this is the most difficult question.  If

1203: $N=3$ is large enough for the semiclassical approach to skyrmions to

1204: be valid, then we believe that our picture of $\Theta^+$ as a

1205: kaon-skyrmion near-threshold state is a good one. It is possible,

1206: however, that the rigid rotator approach carried out directly for

1207: $N=3$, as in \cite{DPP}, is a better approximation to the real world,

1208: as suggested by its successful prediction of the pentaquark.  It is

1209: also possible that quark model approaches, such as those in

1210: \cite{Karliner,JW}, or lattice calculations \cite{Csikor}, will

1211: eventually prove to be more successful.  Clearly, further work, both

1212: experimental and theoretical, is needed to resolve these issues.

1213: 

1214: 

1215: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1216: \section*{Acknowledgments}

1217: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1218: We are grateful to C. Callan, D. Diakonov,

1219: G. Farrar, C.Nappi, V. Petrov and E. Witten for useful

1220: discussions.

1221: This material is based upon work

1222: supported by the National Science Foundation Grants No.

1223: PHY-0243680 and PHY-0140311.

1224: Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in

1225: this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect

1226: the views of the National Science Foundation.

1227: 

1228: 

1229: \begingroup\raggedright\begin{thebibliography}{10}

1230: 

1231: \bibitem{Nakano}

1232: T.~Nakano {\it et al.}  [LEPS Collaboration],

1233: ``Evidence for a narrow $S=+1$ baryon resonance in photoproduction from

1234: the neutron,''

1235: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 91}, 012002 (2003)

1236: [arXiv:hep-ex/0301020].

1237: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0301020;%%

1238: 

1239: \bibitem{Barmin}

1240: V.~V.~Barmin {\it et al.}  [DIANA Collaboration],

1241: ``Observation of a baryon resonance with positive strangeness in K+

1242: collisions with Xe nuclei,''

1243: arXiv:hep-ex/0304040.

1244: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0304040;%%

1245: 

1246: \bibitem{Stepanyan}

1247: S.~Stepanyan {\it et al.}  [CLAS Collaboration],

1248: ``Observation of an exotic S = +1 baryon in exclusive photoproduction

1249: from the deuteron,''

1250: arXiv:hep-ex/0307018.

1251: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0307018;%%

1252: 

1253: \bibitem{Barth}

1254: J.~Barth {\it et al.}  [SAPHIR Collaboration],

1255: ``Observation of the positive-strangeness pentaquark Theta+ in

1256: photoproduction with the SAPHIR detector at ELSA,''

1257: arXiv:hep-ex/0307083.

1258: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0307083;%%

1259: 

1260: \bibitem{Asratyan}

1261: A.~E.~Asratyan, A.~G.~Dolgolenko and M.~A.~Kubantsev,

1262: ``Evidence for formation of a narrow K0(S)p resonance with mass near

1263: 1533-MeV in neutrino interactions,''

1264: arXiv:hep-ex/0309042.

1265: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0309042;%%

1266: 

1267: 

1268: \bibitem{Jaffe}

1269: R.~L.~Jaffe,

1270: ``Baryon Excitations In The Bag Model,''

1271: SLAC-PUB-1774

1272: %\href{http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?r=slac-pub-1774}{SPIRES entry}

1273: {\it Talk presented at the Topical Conf. on Baryon Resonances, Oxford,

1274: Eng., Jul 5-9, 1976}

1275: 

1276: \bibitem{Strottman}

1277: D.~Strottman,

1278: ``Multi - Quark Baryons And The Mit Bag Model,''

1279: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 20}, 748 (1979).

1280: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D20,748;%%

1281: 

1282: \bibitem{Manohar}

1283: A.~V.~Manohar,

1284: ``Equivalence Of The Chiral Soliton And Quark Models In Large N,''

1285: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 248}, 19 (1984).

1286: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B248,19;%%

1287: 

1288: 

1289: \bibitem{Chemtob}

1290: M.~Chemtob,

1291: ``Skyrme Model Of Baryon Octet And Decuplet,''

1292: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 256}, 600 (1985).

1293: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B256,600;%%

1294: 

1295: \bibitem{Praszalowicz}

1296: M.~Praszalowicz,

1297: ``SU(3) Skyrmion,''

1298: TPJU-5-87

1299: {\it Talk presented at the Cracow Workshop on Skyrmions and Anomalies,

1300: Mogilany, Poland, Feb 20-24, 1987}

1301: 

1302: \bibitem{Witten}

1303: E.~Witten,

1304: ``Global Aspects Of Current Algebra,''

1305: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 223}, 422 (1983);

1306: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B223,422;%%

1307: ``Current Algebra, Baryons, And Quark Confinement,''

1308: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 223}, 433 (1983).

1309: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B223,433;%%

1310: 

1311: \bibitem{Guad}

1312: E.~Guadagnini,

1313: ``Baryons As Solitons And Mass Formulae,''

1314: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 236}, 35 (1984).

1315: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B236,35;%%

1316: 

1317: \bibitem{MNP}

1318: P.~O.~Mazur, M.~A.~Nowak and M.~Praszalowicz,

1319: ``SU(3) Extension Of The Skyrme Model,''

1320: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 147}, 137 (1984).

1321: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B147,137;%%

1322: 

1323: \bibitem{DPP}

1324: D.~Diakonov, V.~Petrov and M.~V.~Polyakov,

1325: ``Exotic anti-decuplet of baryons: Prediction from chiral solitons,''

1326: Z.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 359}, 305 (1997)

1327: [arXiv:hep-ph/9703373].

1328: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9703373;%%

1329: 

1330: \bibitem{Stancu}

1331: F.~Stancu and D.~O.~Riska,

1332: ``Stable u u d d anti-s pentaquarks in the constituent quark model,''

1333: arXiv:hep-ph/0307010.

1334: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307010;%%

1335: 

1336: \bibitem{Karliner}

1337: M.~Karliner and H.~J.~Lipkin,

1338: ``The constituent quark model revisited: Quark masses, new predictions

1339: for hadron masses and K N pentaquark,''

1340: arXiv:hep-ph/0307243.

1341: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307243;%%

1342: 

1343: \bibitem{JW}

1344: R.~L.~Jaffe and F.~Wilczek,

1345: ``Diquarks and exotic spectroscopy,''

1346: arXiv:hep-ph/0307341.

1347: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307341;%%

1348: 

1349: \bibitem{Cheung}

1350: K.~Cheung,

1351: ``Pentaquark Theta+, constituent quark structures,

1352: and prediction of charmed Theta/c0 and bottomed Theta/b+,''

1353: arXiv:hep-ph/0308176.

1354: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0308176;%%

1355: 

1356: \bibitem{Jennings}

1357: B.~K.~Jennings and K.~Maltman,

1358: %``Z* resonances: Phenomenology and models,''

1359: arXiv:hep-ph/0308286.

1360: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0308286;%%

1361: 

1362: \bibitem{Csikor}

1363: F.~Csikor, Z.~Fodor, S.~D.~Katz and T.~G.~Kovacs,

1364: ``Pentaquark hadrons from lattice QCD,''

1365: arXiv:hep-lat/0309090.

1366: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0309090;%%

1367: 

1368: \bibitem{Nussinov}

1369: S.~Nussinov,

1370: ``Some comments on the putative Theta+ (1543) exotic state,''

1371: arXiv:hep-ph/0307357.

1372: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307357;%%

1373: 

1374: \bibitem{Arndt}

1375: R.~A.~Arndt, I.~I.~Strakovsky and R.~L.~Workman,

1376: ``K+ nucleon scattering and exotic S = +1 baryons,''

1377: arXiv:nucl-th/0308012.

1378: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 0308012;%%

1379: 

1380: \bibitem{Casher}

1381: A.~Casher and S.~Nussinov,

1382: ``The Narrow Theta(1543)--A QCD Dilemma: Tube or Not Tube?,''

1383: arXiv:hep-ph/0309208.

1384: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309208;%%

1385: 

1386: \bibitem{Krein}

1387: J.~Haidenbauer and G.~Krein,

1388: ``Influence of a Z+(1540) resonance on K+N scattering,''

1389: arXiv:hep-ph/0309243.

1390: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309243;%%

1391: 

1392: 

1393: \bibitem{Skyrme}

1394: T.~H.~Skyrme,

1395: ``A Nonlinear Field Theory,''

1396: Proc.\ Roy.\ Soc.\ Lond.\ A {\bf 260}, 127 (1961);

1397: %%CITATION = PRSLA,A260,127;%%

1398: ``A Unified Field Theory Of Mesons And Baryons,''

1399: Nucl.\ Phys.\  {\bf 31}, 556 (1962).

1400: %%CITATION = NUPHA,31,556;%%

1401: 

1402: \bibitem{Adkins}

1403: G.~S.~Adkins, C.~R.~Nappi and E.~Witten,

1404: ``Static Properties Of Nucleons In The Skyrme Model,''

1405: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 228}, 552 (1983).

1406: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B228,552;%%

1407: 

1408: \bibitem{Vadim}

1409: V. Kaplunovsky, unpublished.

1410: 

1411: \bibitem{Dul}

1412: Z.~Dulinski and M.~Praszalowicz,

1413: ``Large N(C) Limit Of The Skyrme Model,''

1414: Acta Phys.\ Polon.\ B {\bf 18}, 1157 (1988).

1415: %%CITATION = APPOA,B18,1157;%%

1416: 

1417: \bibitem{IRK}

1418: I.~R.~Klebanov,

1419: ``Strangeness In The Skyrme Model,''

1420: PUPT-1158

1421: %\href{http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?r=pupt-1158}

1422: %{SPIRES entry}

1423: {\it Lectures given at NATO ASI on Hadron and Hadronic Matter,

1424: Cargese, France, Aug 8-18, 1989},

1425:  http://curie.princeton.edu/klebanov/strangeness\_paper.pdf

1426: 

1427: \bibitem{Cohen}

1428: T.~D.~Cohen,

1429: ``Chiral soliton models, large N(c) consistency and the Theta+ exotic

1430: baryon,''

1431: arXiv:hep-ph/0309111.

1432: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309111;%%

1433: 

1434: \bibitem{DP}

1435: D.~Diakonov and V.~Petrov,

1436: ``Exotic baryon multiplets at large number of colours,''

1437: arXiv:hep-ph/0309203.

1438: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309203;%%

1439: 

1440: \bibitem{KK}

1441: D.~B.~Kaplan and I.~R.~Klebanov,

1442: ``The Role Of A Massive Strange Quark In The Large N Skyrme Model,''

1443: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 335}, 45 (1990).

1444: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B335,45;%%

1445: 

1446: \bibitem{CK}

1447: C.~G.~Callan and I.~R.~Klebanov,

1448: ``Bound State Approach To Strangeness In The Skyrme Model,''

1449: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 262}, 365 (1985).

1450: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B262,365;%%

1451: 

1452: \bibitem{CHK}

1453: C.~G.~Callan, K.~Hornbostel and I.~R.~Klebanov,

1454: ``Baryon Masses In The Bound State Approach To Strangeness In The Skyrme

1455: Model,''

1456: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 202}, 269 (1988).

1457: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B202,269;%%

1458: 

1459: \bibitem{Lebed}

1460: T.~D.~Cohen and R.~F.~Lebed,

1461: ``Partners of the Theta+ in large N(c) QCD,''

1462: arXiv:hep-ph/0309150.

1463: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309150;%%

1464: 

1465: \bibitem{Scoc}

1466: N.~N.~Scoccola,

1467: ``Hyperon Resonances In SU(3) Soliton Models,''

1468: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 236}, 245 (1990).

1469: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B236,245;%%

1470: 

1471: \bibitem{KM}

1472: M.~Karliner and M.~P.~Mattis,

1473: ``Hadron Dynamics In The Three Flavor Skyrme Model,''

1474: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 56}, 428 (1986);

1475: %%CITATION = PRLTA,56,428;%%

1476: ``Pi N, K N And Anti-K N Scattering: Skyrme Model Versus Experiment,''

1477: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 34}, 1991 (1986).

1478: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D34,1991;%%

1479: 

1480: \bibitem{Riska}

1481: D.~O.~Riska and N.~N.~Scoccola,

1482: ``Anti-charm and anti-bottom hyperons,''

1483: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 299}, 338 (1993).

1484: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B299,338;%%

1485: 

1486: \bibitem{Weigel}

1487: H.~Weigel,

1488: ``Radial excitations of low-lying baryons and the Z+ penta-quark,''

1489: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ A {\bf 2}, 391 (1998)

1490: [arXiv:hep-ph/9804260].

1491: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9804260;%%

1492: 

1493: \bibitem{WittenWZ}

1494: E.~Witten,

1495: ``Global Aspects Of Current Algebra,''

1496: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 223}, 422 (1983).

1497: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B223,422;%%

1498: 

1499: \bibitem{Blom}

1500: U.~Blom, K.~Dannbom and D.~O.~Riska,

1501: ``The Hyperons As Bound States In The Skyrme Model,''

1502: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 493}, 384 (1989).

1503: %%CITATION = NUPHA,A493,384;%%

1504: 

1505: \bibitem{PDG}

1506: K. Hagiwara et al.,

1507: ``The Review of Particle Physics,''

1508: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 010001 (2002).

1509: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D66,010001;%%

1510: 

1511: \bibitem{Rho}

1512: M.~Rho, D.~O.~Riska and N.~N.~Scoccola,

1513: ``The Energy Levels Of The Heavy Flavor Baryons In The Topological

1514: Soliton Model,''

1515: Z.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 341}, 343 (1992).

1516: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,A341,343;%%

1517: 

1518: \bibitem{vector}

1519: N.~N.~Scoccola, D.~P.~Min, H.~Nadeau and M.~Rho,

1520: ``The Strangeness Problem: An SU(3) Skyrmion With Vector Mesons,''

1521: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 505}, 497 (1989).

1522: %%CITATION = NUPHA,A505,497;%%

1523: 

1524: \bibitem{Gobbi}

1525: C.~L.~Schat, N.~N.~Scoccola and C.~Gobbi,

1526: ``Lambda (1405) in the bound state soliton model,''

1527: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 585}, 627 (1995)

1528: [arXiv:hep-ph/9408360].

1529: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9408360;%%

1530: 

1531: \bibitem{Walliser}

1532: H.~Walliser and V.~B.~Kopeliovich,

1533: ``Exotic baryon states in topological soliton models,''

1534: arXiv:hep-ph/0304058.

1535: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0304058;%%

1536: 

1537: \bibitem{Kobushkin}

1538: D.~Borisyuk, M.~Faber and A.~Kobushkin,

1539: ``New family of exotic Theta baryons,''

1540: arXiv:hep-ph/0307370.

1541: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307370;%%

1542: 

1543: \bibitem{oh}

1544: Y.~Oh, B.~Y.~Park and D.~P.~Min,

1545: ``Heavy Quark Symmetry And The Skyrme Model,''

1546: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50}, 3350 (1994)

1547: [arXiv:hep-ph/9407214];

1548: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9407214;%%

1549: ``Pentaquark exotic baryons in the Skyrme model,''

1550: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 331}, 362 (1994)

1551: [arXiv:hep-ph/9405297].

1552: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9405297;%%

1553: 

1554: 

1555: 

1556: \bibitem{an}

1557: G.~S.~Adkins and C.~R.~Nappi,

1558: ``The Skyrme Model With Pion Masses,''

1559: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 233}, 109 (1984).

1560: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B233,109;%%

1561: 

1562: 

1563: 

1564: \end{thebibliography}\endgroup

1565: \end{document}

1566: