1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

2: %\usepackage{cmcyralt}

3: \usepackage{epsfig}

4: \usepackage{epsf,afterpage}

5: \usepackage{amsfonts,amssymb}

6: 

7:  \def\eeq{\end{eqnarray}}

8:  \def\beqs{\begin{eqnarray*}}

9:  \def\eeqs{\end{eqnarray*}}

10:  \def\dl{\delta}

11:  \def\la{\mathrel{\mathpalette\fun <}}

12: \def\ga{\mathrel{\mathpalette\fun >}}

13: \def\fun#1#2{\lower3.6pt\vbox{\baselineskip0pt\lineskip.9pt

14: \ialign{$\mathsurround=0pt#1\hfil

15: ##\hfil$\crcr#2\crcr\sim\crcr}}}

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

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

18:  \newcommand{\lan}{\langle}

19:  \newcommand{\rrr}{\rangle}

20:  \newcommand{\Det}{\mbox{Det}}

21:  \newcommand{\llll}{\langle\langle}

22:  \newcommand{\rrrr}{\rangle\rangle}

23:  \newcommand{\T}{\mbox{Tr}\> }

24: \newcommand{\dv}{\mathrm{div}}

25: \newcommand{\rot}{\mathrm{rot}}

26: \newcommand{\veM}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm M}$}}

27: \newcommand{\veR}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm R}$}}

28: \newcommand{\veP}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm {\cal P}}$}}

29: \newcommand{\veD}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm {\cal D}}$}}

30: \newcommand{\veB}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm B}$}}

31: \newcommand{\veE}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm  E}$}}

32: \newcommand{\vecE}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm{\cal E}}$}}

33: \newcommand{\vecB}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm{\cal B}}$}}

34: \newcommand{\ven}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm n}$}}

35: \newcommand{\veF}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm F}$}}

36: \newcommand{\ver}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm r}$}}

37: \newcommand{\vex}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm x}$}}

38: \newcommand{\vek}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm k}$}}

39: \newcommand{\veu}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm u}$}}

40: \newcommand{\vnabla}{\mbox{\boldmath${\rm \nabla}$}}

41: \newcommand{\bc}{\begin{center}}

42: \newcommand{\ec}{\end{center}}

43: \newcommand{\e}{\mathrm{e}}

44: \newcommand{\mr}[1]{\mathrm{#1}}

45: \newcommand{\fr}[2]{\frac{#1}{#2}}

46: \newcommand{\lt}{\left}

47: \newcommand{\rt}{\right}

48: \newcommand{\too}{\mathop{\to}\limits_{N_C\to\infty}}

49: \newcommand{\ra}{\rightarrow}

50: \newcommand{\vph}{\varphi}

51: \newcommand{\vx}{\vec{x}}

52: \newcommand{\vy}{\vec{y}}

53: \newcommand{\vz}{\vec{z}}

54: \newcommand{\vk}{\vec{k}}

55: \newcommand{\vp}{\vec{p}}

56: \newcommand{\vn}{\vec{n}}

57: \newcommand{\ds}{\displaystyle}

58: \newcommand{\rf}[1]{(\ref{#1})}

59: \newcommand{\lb}{\label}

60: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.1}

61:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

62:  % MACROS FOR GRAPHICS

63:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

64:  %\input psfig

65:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

66:  %  REFERENCES

67:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

68:  \def\NPB#1#2#3{Nucl. Phys. {\bf B#1} (#2) #3}

69:  \def\PRD#1#2#3{Phys. Rev. {\bf D#1} (#2) #3}

70:  \def\PRold#1#2#3{Phys. Rev. {\bf #1} (#2) #3}

71:  \def\PLB#1#2#3{Phys. Lett. {\bf B#1} (#2) #3}

72:  \def\PLBold#1#2#3{Phys. Lett. {\bf #1B} (#2) #3}

73:  \def\PRP#1#2#3{Phys. Rep. {\bf #1} (#2) #3}

74:  \def\PRL#1#2#3{Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf #1} (#2) #3}

75:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

76:  %  COMMANDS \gsim AND \lsim FOR >= AND <= SIGNS.

77:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

78:  \def\centeron#1#2{{\setbox0=\hbox{#1}\setbox1=\hbox{#2}\ifdim

79:  \wd1>\wd0\kern.5\wd1\kern-.5\wd0\fi

80:  \copy0\kern-.5\wd0\kern-.5\wd1\copy1\ifdim\wd0>\wd1

81:  \kern.5\wd0\kern-.5\wd1\fi}}

82:  \def\ltap{\;\centeron{\raise.35ex\hbox{$<$}}{\lower.65ex\hbox{$\sim$}}\;}

83:  \def\gtap{\;\centeron{\raise.35ex\hbox{$>$}}{\lower.65ex\hbox{$\sim$}}\;}

84:  \def\gsim{\mathrel{\gtap}}

85:  \def\lsim{\mathrel{\ltap}}

86: 

87:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

88:  %  PREAMBULE

89:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

90: 

91:  \begin{document}

92:  

93: 

94:  \vskip 1.2cm

95: 

96: \begin{titlepage}

97:  

98: 

99:  \vskip 1.2cm

100: 

101:  \begin{center}

102: 

103:  {\LARGE\bf The QCD vacuum, confinement and strings}

104: 

105: \vskip 0.1cm

106: 

107: {\LARGE\bf  in the Vacuum Correlator Method}

108:  \vskip 1.4cm

109:  {\bf \large D.S.Kuzmenko, V.I.Shevchenko, Yu.A.Simonov}

110:  \\

111:  \vskip 0.3cm

112: {\it Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics,

113:  \\ Moscow, Russia}

114:  \\

115:  \vskip 0.45cm 

116:  e-mail: kuzmenko@heron.itep.ru; shevchen@heron.itep.ru; simonov@heron.itep.ru

117: 

118:  \vskip 2cm

119: 

120:  \begin{abstract}

121: In this review paper the QCD vacuum properties and the structure of

122: color fields in hadrons

123: are studied using complete set of gauge-invariant correlators of

124: the gluon fields. Confinement in QCD is produced by the correlators of

125: some certain Lorentz structure, which violate abelian Bianchi identities

126: and therefore are absent in the case of QED. These correlators are used

127: to define an effective colorless field, which satisfies Maxwell equation

128: with nonzero effective magnetic current. With the help of the effective field

129: and correlators it is demonstrated that quarks are confined due to 

130: effective magnetic currents, squeezing gluonic fields into a string, in 

131: agreement with the ``dual Meissner effect''. Distribution of 

132: effective gluonic fields are

133: plotted in mesons, baryons and glueballs with static sources.

134: \end{abstract}  

135: \end{center} 

136:  \vskip 1.0 cm

137: 

138:  \end{titlepage}

139: 

140:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

141:  % COUNTERS

142:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

143:  \setcounter{footnote}{0} \setcounter{page}{2}

144:  \setcounter{section}{0} \setcounter{subsection}{0}

145:  \setcounter{subsubsection}{0}

146: 

147:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

148:  % THE MAIN TEXT

149:  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

150:  

151: \section{Introduction}

152: The QCD is a unique example of field theory, lacking internal contradictions 

153: and at the same time explaining all physical phenomena in strong interactions 

154:  \cite{i1,i2}. The theoretical understanding of QCD is complicated due to the 

155: fact that all its basic features are of the nonperturbative nature, and the QCD

156: vacuum is a dense and highly nontrivial substance. In fact, in the modern

157: quantum field theory one often represents the vacuum as a specific material

158: substance with definite characteristics in direct analogy with the condensed 

159: matter physics. As illustrating examples one can mention the Casimir effect

160: and relative phenomena, and also the Higgs mechanism in the standard model.

161: In the last case one deals with the vacuum condensate of the scalar field

162:  $\lan \phi \rrr$, while quantum  excitations above this condensate are

163: considered as Higgs particles. 

164: 

165: The nontriviality of the QCD vacuum is revealed by the fact that this medium

166: has nonzero values of gluonic condensate \cite{i3}, $\lan F^a_{\mu\nu} F^a_{\mu\nu} \rrr = 

167: (600\>{\mbox{MeV}})^4$, and of the quark condensate,  $\lan \bar{q} q 

168: \rrr = - (250\>{\mbox{MeV}})^3$. As it has become clear during last decades

169: it is the vacuum properties which bring about confinement (see, e.g., the

170: review \cite{i4}). For theoretical calculations in QCD one usually exploited

171: till recently the perturbation theory augmented by some models of nonperturbative

172: mechanisms. The situation changed with the advent of the QCD sum rule method

173:  \cite{i3}, which uses the gauge-invariant formalism of condensates to describe

174: the nonperturbative contributions. However for most effects at large distances 

175: this method is not sufficient, e.g. for confinement or spontaneous violation

176: of chiral symmetry. The systematic  description of all, in principle,

177: QCD phenomena is made possible due to the appearence of the Vacuum Correlator

178: Method (VCM), see  \cite{i51,i52,i53} and the review \cite{i6}, which exploits

179: as basic elements the complete set of field correlators of the form 

180: \be

181: D^{(n)}_{\mu_1\nu_1 ... \mu_n\nu_n}(x_1,...,x_n,x_0) =

182: \lan \T G_{\mu_1\nu_1}(x_1,x_0) . . . G_{\mu_n\nu_n}(x_n,x_0) \rrr

183: \label{ir5}

184: \ee

185: where the notation   $G_{\mu_1\nu_1}(x_1,x_0)$ is used for the gluonic field

186: strength covariantly shifted along some curve, see Eq.   (\ref{ev983}).

187: 

188: The basis of the VCM are the gauge-invariant Green's functions of white objects,

189: which can be written as path integrals through field correlators (\ref{ir5})

190: using the cluster expansion, see e.g. \cite{i53,i71,i72}. A question may 

191: arise at this point, why one considers in VCM only white (i.e. 

192: gauge-invariant)

193: objects, and not for example propagators in some fixed gauge? The answer

194: is tightly connected to the difference between gauge invariance in abelian

195: and nonabelian theories. In the abelian theory, e.g. in QED, the

196: requirement of gauge-invariance

197: does not forbid to consider the problems with formally 

198: gauge-noninvariant asymptotic states, like electron-electron scattering.

199: The gauge invariance of the cross-section occurs in this case due to the

200: conservation of the abelian current. In the nonabelian theory with confinement,

201: like QCD, the situation is different and the problem of scattering of isolated 

202: quarks has no sense. Formally one can see that nonlocal gauge noninvariant matrix element

203: vanishes when being averaged over gluonic vacuum, which is a property of the

204: nonabelian $SU(N)$ group. Therefore instead one considers in QCD the quark-quark

205:  scattering for quarks inside white objects (i.e. described by the gauge-invariant

206: functions), such as hadrons. The same is true for the problems connected

207: to the spectrum of bound states --- while in QED the problem of a neutral

208: atom spectrum is just as valid as that of the spectrum of a charged ion, in QCD

209: an analog of the last problem has no meaning. 

210: 

211: Therefore the set of correlators  (\ref{ir5}) can be considered as a starting

212: dynamical basis yielding a phenomenological gauge-invariant description

213: of physical processes. In fact, however, the situation is much more interesting.

214: First of all, the lattice calculations give important evidence that already

215: the first nontrivial correlator with $n=2$ dominates, and the total contribution

216: of all highest correlators is below few percent, see review \cite{i9}. As was

217: shown in \cite{i52,i53}, the lowest (or Gaussian\footnote{using the analogy with

218: so-called Gaussian, or white, noise described by a quadratic correlator,

219: in this case with vanishing correlation length} as it will be called in what 

220: follows) correlator can be expressed through two scalar formfactors

221:  $D(x_1 - x_2)$ and $D_1(x_1 - x_2)$.   

222: Secondly, both formfactors  have been measured in the lattice calculations

223: and have nonperturbative parts of exponential shape with a characteristic

224: small correlation length $\lambda$. Finally, the function

225:  $D^{(2)}$ (and therefore also  $D(x_1 - x_2)$, $D_1(x_1 - x_2)$) are

226: directly connected to the Green's functions of the so-called gluelumps

227:  \cite{i111,i112,i113}. The latter can be calculated analytically in terms

228: of the only mass scale of QCD, e.g. through the string tension  $\sigma$ and

229: the coupling constant $\alpha_s$. Thus the formulation of the nonperturbative

230: dynamics in QCD turns out to be selfconsistent and one should in addition

231: calculate $\lambda$ through $\sigma$, what was done earlier in  \cite{i12},

232: and also connect  $\sigma$ and $\Lambda_{QCD}$ and write down the explicit form

233: of correlators  $D^{(n)}$. This way one would also be able to

234: understand analytically the dominance of $D^{(2)}$ (one can find the

235: first results in this direction in \cite{i13,i14}).

236: 

237: With all that the formalism of field correlators is to a large extent unusual

238: to physicists, brought up in the standard lore of perturbative, or even more,

239: of abelian gauge theory. In the context of the confinement problem such

240: a ``linear'' abelian approach is realized in the so-called ``dual Meissner 

241: scenario'', which contains a simple qualitative picture of the confinement 

242: mechanism in QCD \cite{i151,i152}. In this approach the acting roles have charges

243: (quarks) and the monopole medium filling the vacuum. Many lattice and analytic

244: studies, see, e.g.,  \cite{i16} - \cite{i182}, demonstrate that the string 

245: formation between quark and antiquark is connected in this picture with the

246: appearence of circular monopole currents  ${\bf k}$ around the string, which

247: obey the dual Ampere law ${\bf k} = {\mbox{rot}}\> {\bf E}$. From the physical

248: point of view this situation is similar to the Meissner effect in the standard

249: superconductivity phenomenon, modulo interchange of effective electric and

250: magnetic charges. On the other hand, the defect of this picture is that the very

251: notion of the magnetic monopole cannot be exactly defined in QCD. This 

252: arbitrariness  can be seen, first of all, in the gauge dependence of the

253: monopole definition, and secondly,

254: in the difficulties with the continuum limit for the lattice monopoles,

255: defined by the flux through an elementary cube. There is a lot of literature,

256: with different suggestions on how to deal with this problems, see e.g. \cite{i19}.

257: 

258: 

259: While confinement properties are studied on the lattice numerically, including

260: partly the abelian projection, they are also an object of investigation

261: in the effective Lagrangian approach and in different dielectric vacuum models

262: of QCD \cite{ap}-\cite{chrom2}. The basic field theory problem in this case

263: is replaced by a classical variational problem for the effective Lagrangian,

264: which yields a system of differential equations, to be solved numerically.

265: In this way one introduces an effective dielectric constant of the vacuum,

266: depending on the effective fields and ensuring quark confinement.

267: 

268: In what follows we shall use another approach which is fully 

269: gauge-invariant and yields a simple and selfconsistent picture of the 

270: confining string formation. Namely, using the field correlator method as a 

271: universal 

272: language, one can define

273: gauge-invariant (with respect to the gauge symmetry of the original nonabelian

274: theory) effective field $\:$ ${\cal F}_{\mu\nu}(x)$ via the W-loop.

275: The effective electric field near the charge turns out to be the gradient

276: of the color-Coulomb field, and in the case of an abelian theory

277:  ${\cal F}_{\mu\nu}(x)$ is the standard field strength. The effective field

278: satisfies Maxwell equations, having on the r.h.s. electric current

279:  $j_{\mu}$ and magnetic current $k_{\mu}$. The source of $k_{\mu}$

280: is primarily the triple correlator of the form $\lan EEB \rrr$ (as was already

281:  found in \cite{i4}) describing the emission of the color-magnetic field by the 

282: color-electric; the latter can be visualized as the emission of the color-magnetic

283: field by an effective magnetic charge (monopole). In the language of field 

284: correlators one can easily demonstrate that the system of equations for the 

285: effective fields describes the QCD string and the circular magnetic currents around

286:  it. In this way the picture of the dual Meissner effect is given in 

287: gauge-invariant terms.

288: 

289: With the help of  ${\cal F}_{\mu\nu}$ one can investigate in detail the 

290: structure

291: of the QCD string. The first computations of the string profile in  \cite{i20}

292: have demonstrated a very good agreement of the results calculated via $D(x^2), 

293: D_1(x^2)$ and those obtained independently on the lattice. The following

294: study of the string structure \cite{field} has shown an interesting phenomenon

295: of the profile saturation, where the profile (i.e. the field distribution

296: across the string) does not change for long enough strings. The relief of the

297: baryon field has turned out to be even more interesting. Baryons,

298: and more exact, nucleons are the basis of the bulk of the stable matter

299: around us. The physical problem of the structure of the baryon field

300: is especially interesting both

301: from theoretical and practical points of view.

302: Two types of baryon field configurations were discussed in the literature: with the string junction in the middle

303: (the $Y$-shape) and of the triangular shape (the ($\Delta$-shape).

304: Using vacuum correlator method the baryon configuration was computed analytically

305: in \cite{string,rep3}, where the presence  of the string junction in the field

306: distribution was explicitly  demonstrated, thereby excluding the $\Delta$-type

307: configuration. On the other hand, the latter is possible for the three-gluon

308: glueballs and the corresponding field was calculated in  \cite{rep3}. One should

309: mention that these baryon field distributions are also in agreement with

310: the lattice calculations using the abelian projected QCD \cite{Born1}, see also

311: the review paper of Bornyakov {\it et. al.} \cite{Born2}.

312: 

313: The field sources in three-gluon glueballs are three valence gluons.

314: The field structure of these systems has some specific features, and

315: can be of both types, of the $\Delta$-type (unlike baryons), and of the

316: $Y$-type  (like baryons), and its study helps to understand better physics

317: of confinement. Moreover, the three-gluon glueballs have to do with the

318: processes of the odderon exchange (i.e. glueball exchange with odd charge parity),

319: and hence are also interesting from the experimental point of view.

320: Therefore, in addition to the effective field distributions, we shall also 

321: discuss below the W-loops and the static potentials of baryons and three-gluon

322:  glueballs.  

323: 

324: The paper has the following structure. In chapter 2 the discussion of field

325: correlator properties in QCD is given, and in particular the important

326: phenomenon of the Casimir scaling is explained. In chapter 3 the effective

327: field ${\cal F}_{\mu\nu}$ and currents $j_{\mu}$, $k_{\mu}$ are introduced

328: and the dual Meissner effect is demonstrated. In chapter 4 the static potentials

329: and field  distributions in baryons and three-gluon glueballs are given.

330: In Conclusions the main results are summarized and some prospectives are outlined.

331: 

332: Everywhere in what follows, if it is not especially stressed otherwise,

333: the Euclidean metrics is used with notations for 4-vectors 

334: $k=(k_1,k_2,k_3,k_4)$

335: and for scalar products $kp = k_{\mu} p^{\nu} \delta_{\nu}^{\mu}$.

336: The three-dimensional vectors are denoted as  ${\bf k} = (k_1,k_2,k_3)$ and

337: the Wick rotation corresponds to the replacement $k_4 \to ik_0$.

338: 

339: 

340: 

341:  \section{Properties of QCD vacuum in gauge-invariant approach}

342: 

343: 

344: 

345: \subsection{Definition of gauge-invariant correlators}

346: 

347: 

348: The following remark is to be made before we proceed. There is an

349: important difference between pure Yang-Mills theory (gluodynamics)

350: and QCD, namely the latter contains dynamical fermions, in

351: particular light $u$ and $d$ quarks. This circumstance plays no

352: crucial role in the description of confinement since gluodynamics

353: confines color as QCD does, which is supported by direct lattice

354: calculations (see, e.g. \cite{bali1}) and different qualitative

355: arguments. Because of that in most cases we consider pure

356: Yang-Mills theory in this review, while quarks play a role of

357: external sources.

358: 

359: \noindent One of the main objects in gauge theory is the Wegner-Wilson

360: loop \cite{w1,w2} which we denote here as W-loop: 

361: \be W(C)= {\mbox{P}}\exp i

362: g\oint\limits_C A_{\mu}^a(z) t^a dz_{\mu} \label{ev981} \ee where

363: $t^a$ - generators in the given representations of the gauge

364: group. W-loop defines external current $J$ which corresponds

365: to a point particle charged according to the chosen representation

366: and moving along the closed contour $C$. Phase factor for

367: non-closed curve connecting points $x$ and $y$ is also of

368: importance \be \Phi(x;y)= {\mbox{P}}\exp i g\int\limits_x^y

369: A_{\mu}^a(z) t^a dz_{\mu} \label{ev982} \ee Under the gauge

370: transformations we have \be \Phi(x;y) \to \Phi^U(x;y) =

371: U^{\dagger}(x) \Phi(x;y) U(y) \label{err} \ee It means that the

372: trace $\T W(C)$ is gauge-invariant.\footnote{In the literature the

373: trace is often included in the definition of the W-loop.} We

374: normalize $\T$ everywhere as $\T {\bf 1}_d = 1$ for the given

375: representation of dimension $d$. Making use of the  definition

376: (\ref{ev982}), let us introduce  $G_{\mu\nu}(x,x_0)$ as \be

377: G_{\mu\nu}(x,x_0) = \Phi(x_0;x)F_{\mu\nu}(x)\Phi(x;x_0)

378: \label{ev983} \ee where $F_{\mu\nu} = \partial_{\mu} A_{\nu} -

379: \partial_{\nu} A_{\mu} -i[A_{\mu}A_{\nu}]$ is nonabelian field

380: strength and the curve connecting the points $x$ and $x_0$ does

381: not self-intersect. In abelian theory $G_{\mu\nu}(x,x_0)\equiv

382: F_{\mu\nu}(x)$, however in Yang-Mills theory $G_{\mu\nu}(x,x_0)$

383: and $F_{\mu\nu}(x)$ transform differently under gauge

384: transformations, as it is clear from (\ref{err}). We can now

385: construct vacuum averages of the products of $G_{\mu\nu}(x_n,x_0)$

386: in the following way \be D^{(2)}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}(x,y,x_0) =

387: \lan \T G_{\mu\nu}(x,x_0) G_{\rho\sigma}(y,x_0) \rrr

388: \label{ev9884} \ee \be

389: D^{(3)}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma\alpha\beta}(x,y,z,x_0) = \lan \T

390: G_{\mu\nu}(x,x_0) G_{\rho\sigma}(y,x_0) G_{\alpha\beta}(z,x_0)

391: \rrr \label{ev9885} \ee and analogously for higher orders. The

392: correlators (\ref{ev9884}), (\ref{ev9885}) are gauge-invariant,

393: but nonlocal - expressions (\ref{ev9884}), (\ref{ev9885}) depend

394: on the position of the points $x$, $y$, $z$ as well as on the

395: position of the point $x_0$ and contour profile used in

396: (\ref{ev983}). Physical observables such as static potential

397: extracted from the W-loop do not depend on $x_0$ and contour

398: profiles when all correlators $D^{(n)}$, $n\ge 2$ are taken into

399: account. It is not true, however if one takes only the lowest

400: $n=2$ term. In this case it is convenient to minimize the

401: corresponding dependence like one does in perturbation theory

402: minimizing the contribution of omitted terms by the proper choice

403: of  subtraction point $\mu$ on which the exact answer should not

404: depend.

405: 

406: \subsection{Computation of the W-loop and Green's functions in terms of

407: correlators}

408: 

409: Speaking in general terms, for a given gauge theory each function $D^{(n)}$

410: is important characteristics of its vacuum structure by itself. What is

411: more important, however is the possibility to express W-loop average in 

412: terms of correlators (\ref{ev9884}), (\ref{ev9885}).

413: Indeed, Stokes theorem (or, more precisely, its nonabelian generalization \cite{nast1}-\cite{nast6}) leads to \be

414: \lan \T W(C) \rrr = \left\lan \T {\cal P}\exp ig\int\limits_S G_{\mu\nu}(z,x_0) d\sigma_{\mu\nu}(z) \right\rrr

415: = \exp \sum\limits_{n=2}^{\infty} (ig)^n \Delta^{(n)}[S]

416: \label{nast}

417: \ee

418: there we have used cluser expansion to exponentiate the series (see, e.g.

419: \cite{vk1,vk2}). Integral moments $\Delta^{(n)}[S]$ over the surface $S$ of {\it irreducible} correlators, known as cumulants in statistical physics can be expressed as linear combinations of the integrals of correlators

420:  $D^{(n)}$. For example, we have for two-point correlator

421: \be

422: \Delta^{(2)}[S] = \frac12 \int\limits_S d\sigma_{\mu\nu}(z_1)

423: \int\limits_S d\sigma_{\rho\sigma}(z_2) D^{(2)}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}(z_1,z_2,x_0)

424: \label{ev960}

425: \ee

426: For higher terms the ordering is important, see, e.g. \cite{i13},

427: where exact computations for $n=4$ are performed.

428: 

429: Expression (\ref{nast}) is of central importance for the discussed

430: formalism. Let us consider the propagation of the spinless

431: particle with mass $m$, carrying fundamental color charge

432: ("quark") in the field of infinitely heavy "antiquark" \cite{i53,i71,i72}.

433: The corresponding gauge-invariant Green's function reads as \be

434: {\cal G}(x,y) = \lan \phi^{\dagger}(x) \Phi(x;y) \phi(y) \rrr

435: \label{ev156} \ee where we denote quark field as $\phi(x)$. One

436: can demonstrate that ${\cal G}(x,y)$ has the following

437: Feynman-Schwinger representation \be {\cal G}(x,y) =

438: \int\limits_0^{\infty} ds \int\limits_{z_\mu(0) = x_\mu}^{z_\mu(s)

439: = y_\mu} {\cal D} z_{\mu} \exp\left(-m^2s -\frac14 \int\limits_0^s

440: d\tau \left(\frac{dz_{\mu}(\tau)}{d\tau}\right)^2 \right) \cdot

441: \lan \T W(C) \rrr \label{ev157} \ee where the closed contour $C$

442: is formed by the quark trajectory $ z_{\mu}(\tau)$ and that of

443: antiquark (the latter is nothing but the straight line connecting

444: the points  $x$ and $y$). We have taken spinless case here as the

445: simplest illustrative example, for real physical problems with

446: spinor quark fields there is a systematic way of analysis of spin

447: effects \cite{simlq,i71,i72}. The problem of two-body meson state or

448: three-body baryon one can be addressed in completely analogous

449: way. In all cases Green's function containing full information

450: about mass spectrum and wave functions of the system can be

451: re-written in terms of path integrals of the W-loops there

452: the latter are expressed via correlators  as in (\ref{nast}).

453: 

454: 

455: Therefore the set of correlators

456:  $D^{(n)}$  provides rich and, what is more important, universal dynamical information one can use to compute

457:  different nonperturbative effects.\footnote{Discussed formalism can be

458:  applied in perturbation theory as well. In this context it allows to sum up perturbative

459:  subseries with subsequent exponentiation with the well-known "Sudakov formfactor" as a result of the first

460:  approximation, see \cite{yu8}, \cite{i72} and references therein.}

461: Let us stress once again that the correlator (\ref{ev9884}) is

462: itself related to the Green's function of gluon excitation in the

463: field of infinitely heavy adjoint source - known in the literature

464: as gluelump \cite{i111}- \cite{i113}.

465: 

466: Coming to practical side of the problem, it is natural to ask what

467: the actual behavior of the correlators  (\ref{ev9884}),

468: (\ref{ev9885}) is and how information about it can be gained. This

469: question is simple to answer in perturbation theory since each

470: $D^{(n)}$ is given by perturbative series, see, e.g. \cite{ej1,ej2}.

471: There are a few ways to proceed beyond perturbation theory. The

472: first one is to find nonperturbative solutions to the so called

473: BBGKI equations, relating the correlators of different orders

474: \cite{as}. This way has brought no essential progress up to now.

475: Another analytic strategy suggests to compute correlators in terms

476: of gluelump Green's functions \cite{i111}-\cite{i12}. The third and the

477: most successful way is to study the problem on the lattice. There

478: are quite a few sets of numerical data \cite{i101}-\cite{bcor}, which we

479: discuss below. However it is obvious that numerical results

480: concerning one or a few particular correlators are useless if

481: general properties of the whole ensemble are unknown. To discuss

482: them we come back to the expression (\ref{nast}).

483: 

484: \subsection{Gaussian dominance}

485: 

486: It has already been stressed that the price we have payed for

487: manifest gauge-invariance of (\ref{nast}) is the dependence of

488: (\ref{ev9884}), (\ref{ev9885}) on the contour profiles entering

489: $\Phi(x;y)$. These contours are, generally speaking, arbitrary

490: non-selfintersecting curves or, better to say, they can be freely

491: chosen in some (large enough) set. As a result the quantities

492: $\Delta^{(n)}[S]$ in (\ref{nast}) depend on this choice while

493: $W(C)$ is obviously independent on $S$. The contradiction is

494: spurious and one can demonstrate that this contour dependence is

495: cancelled in the total sum, despite it is present in each

496: individual summand $\Delta^{(n)}[S]$. In this sense the choice of

497: the surface $S$ in (\ref{nast}) (corresponding to the choice of

498: integration contours in the correlators $D^{(n)}$) is free, as it

499: should be. We can take a different attitude and ask the following

500: question: what is the hierarchy of cumulants $\Delta^{(n)}[S]$ on

501: some particular surface? This question is of general interest but

502: it has also important practical meaning - in many problems one has

503: to deal with the surface, which is singled out by some physical

504: reasons. For a single W-loop it is obviously given by minimal

505: area surface, bounded by the contour. In more complicated case of

506: interacting loops  \cite{we5} the surface corresponding to the

507: minimal energy of the system can be taken. In any case, it is

508: instructive to make a distinction between two different scenarios:

509: \be

510:  \Delta^{(2)}[S] \gg \sum\limits_{n=3}^{\infty}\>\Delta^{(n)}[S]

511: \label{ev65} \ee which is referred to as {\it stochastic}

512: scenario, while the case when (\ref{ev65}) does not hold (for

513: example, all cumulants are of the same order) is known as {\it

514: coherent}. General framework described in the present paper takes

515: into account effects of all cumulants but as it should be clear,

516: it shows its strong sides in stochastic case. The lowest two-point

517: Gaussian cumulant (\ref{ev960}) is dominant in stochastic

518: ensemble, while higher order terms can be considered as small

519: corrections. This situation is known as Gaussian dominance. Then

520: we can ask is the QCD vacuum stochastic or coherent? To answer

521: this question in straightforward way one has to compute (for

522: example, numerically on the lattice) different cumulants and check

523: them against (\ref{ev65}). Unfortunately this research program is

524: too intricate for modern lattice technologies and almost all

525: actual results are obtained for Gaussian cumulant only. There are

526: important indirect evidences however supporting the idea that Yang

527: -Mills vacuum is indeed stochastic and not coherent in the sense

528: of (\ref{ev65}). Of prime importance in this context is Casimir

529: scaling phenomenon

530:  \cite{bali21}-\cite{deldar2}, see also \cite{lucini1}-\cite{lucini4}. Using (\ref{nast})

531: and taking into account well known relation between static

532: potential and W-loop average, one can get, assuming Gaussian

533: dominance \be V(R)= \lim\limits_{T\to\infty} \frac{1}{T} \> g^2

534: \Delta^{(2)}[S=R\times T] \label{ev36} \ee and, according to

535: (\ref{ev9884}) and (\ref{ev960}) we have $V(R)\sim C_d$, where an

536: eigenvalue of Casimir operator in the representation $d$ is given

537: by  $\dl_{ab} t^a t^b  = C_d \cdot {\bf 1}_d $. Let us remind that

538: representation of the Lie group $SU(N)$ of dimension $d$ is

539: characterized by $N^2 -1$ generators  $t^a$, which can be realized

540: as $d\times d$ matrices commuting as $[t^a t^b] = if^{abc} t^c$.

541: Proportionality of the static potential to $C_d$ is called Casimir

542: scaling \cite{faber3} and was discussed for the first time in \cite{aop}.

543: 

544: 

545: It can easily be shown that contributions from higher cumulants to the static potential (\ref{ev36}) are, generally speaking, not proportional to

546:  $C_d$ (despite they can contain linear in $C_d$ terms). Therefore a good accuracy (deviation not exceeding 5\%) of Casimir scaling demonstrated on the lattice

547: is a serious argument in favor of Gaussian dominance. Moreover,

548: attempts to reproduce Casimir scaling in many other models of

549: nonperturbative QCD vacuum encounter difficulties

550: \cite{simcas11,simcas12,i9}. Another argument is the observed independence

551: of radius of the confining string between quarks on their

552: nonabelian charge (i.e. on representation $d$) \cite{trot}. These

553: results would look as fine tuning effects without Gaussian

554: dominance. It is also worth mentioning that "vacuum state

555: dominance" successfully used for years in QCD sum rules formalism is nothing

556: but Gaussian dominance in our language.

557: 

558: \subsection{Structure of two-point correlators}

559: 

560: We have mentioned above the relation between correlators

561:  $D^{(n)}$ and gluelump Green's functions. For the simplest Gaussian correlator (\ref{ev9884}) this can be seen clearly if the contours are straight lines and points $x,y,x_0$ belong to one and the same line. The correlator depends on the only variable $z=x-y$ in this case and can be represented as

562: \be

563: D^{(2)}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}(z) =

564: \left\lan F_{\mu\nu}^a(0) \cdot {\mbox{P}}\exp \left(ig\int\limits_0^1 ds\>

565: z_{\mu} A^b_{\mu}(sz)f^{abc}\right)\cdot F^c_{\rho\sigma}(z) \right\rrr

566: \label{ev9888}

567: \ee

568: Expression (\ref{ev9888}) contains phase factor in the adjoint 

569: (compare with the previous formulas where we worked with fundamental phase factors, i.e. with $N\times N$ matrices) which makes its physical content self-evident.

570: Namely, gauge-invariant function  $D^{(2)}(z)$ describes

571: gluon propagation in the field of infinitely heavy adjoint charge at the origin in full analogy with fundamental case (compare (\ref{ev156}) and (\ref{ev9888})).

572: 

573: Confining string worldsheet given by the surface $S$ in

574: (\ref{nast}) interacts with itself by gluelump exchanges. This

575: interaction depends on the profile of $S$ in such a way that the

576: total answer for the W-loop average is $S$-independent.

577: Gaussian dominance means, qualitatively, that for some particular

578: surface this "gluelump gas" becomes "ideal" and integral

579: contribution of higher cumulants $\Delta^{(n)}$, $n>2$  is small

580: on this surface. This also means that two-gluon gluelumps weakly

581: interact with each other. The deviation from Casimir scaling (as

582: we have already noticed, it is small) can be expressed in terms of

583: irreducible averages of gauge-invariant operators

584:  $\lan \T {\cal O}_1 \T {\cal O}_2 \rrr$, describing interaction of gluelumps \cite{i13}. One immediately realises that such deviation is suppressed in large $N$ limit. To avoid misunderstanding let us stress that gluelumps do not exist as physical particles in the spectrum of the theory. It would also be wrong to interpret  (\ref{ev9888}) in terms of "massive gluon". In a limited sense gluelumps are analogous to Kalb-Ramond fields which describe dual vector bosons and play important role in constructing string representation of compact QED \cite{polyakov} and abelian Higgs model \cite{lee}

585:  (see also \cite{ant2,ant3}).

586: The discussed picture with gluelump ensemble on the worldsheet makes sense only in the presence of external current, forming the W-loop. On the other hand the correlator (\ref{ev9888}) may be studied as it is, with no reference to any external source. Before we discuss actual lattice results, it is useful to represent (\ref{ev9888}) in terms of two invariant formfactors

587:  $D(z^2)$ and $D_1(z^2)$ \cite{i51}-\cite{i53}

588: $$

589: g^2 D^{(2)}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}(z) = (\dl_{\mu\rho} \dl_{\nu\sigma} -

590: \dl_{\mu\sigma} \dl_{\nu\rho}) D(z^2) +

591: $$

592: \be + \frac12 \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial z_{\mu}}  (z_{\rho}

593: \dl_{\nu\sigma} - z_{\sigma} \dl_{\nu\rho})  -

594: \frac{\partial}{\partial z_{\nu}}  (z_{\rho} \dl_{\mu\sigma} -

595: z_{\sigma} \dl_{\mu\rho})\right)  D_1(z^2) \label{ew1} \ee

596: Confinement (linear potential between static quark and antiquark

597: in fundamental representation) takes place in Gaussian dominance

598: picture when $D(z^2)$ is nonzero. At large distances we have from

599: (\ref{ev960}), (\ref{ev36}) for static potential $V(R)$ and string

600: tension $\sigma$: \be V(R) = \sigma R + {\cal O}(R^0) \;\;\; ;

601: \;\;\; \sigma = \frac12 \int d^2 z D(z^2) \label{potw2} \ee while

602: at small distances perturbative contribution dominates \cite{ej1,ej2}.

603: Nonperturbative part of the correlator is usually taken as \be

604: D(z^2) \sim \exp\left(-|z|/\lambda\right) \label{expon} \ee and this

605: exponential fit is in very good agreement with lattice data at

606: large enough distances. The situation with nonperturbative

607: component of the function $D_1(z^2)$ is less clear. In any case, 

608: physically the exact function $D_1(z^2)$ containing perturbative and

609: nonperturbative pieces must be exponentially

610: suppressed at large enough distances.

611: It is important that from practical point of view one has

612: no need to know the detailed profile of formfactors $D(z^2)$,

613: $D_1(z^2)$: physical quantities are given as integral moments of

614: these functions as in (\ref{potw2}). Quantity $\lambda$ is known as

615: correlation length of QCD vacuum and as it is clear from our

616: discussion this quantity is nothing but the inverse mass of the

617: lowest gluelump: $\lambda = 1/M$. On the other hand, typical size of

618: vacuum domain where fields are correlated is given by the same

619: $\lambda$ \cite{nacht}. We use numerical value $\lambda = 0.2$ fm in

620: accordance with the lattice results. Physics of nonlocality

621: switches on at distances larger that $\lambda$ and has many

622: phenomenological manifestations. One of the most interesting - the

623: confining string formation - will be discussed in what follows.

624: 

625: So far we have not mentioned the problem of deconfinement. There are basically two groups of physically interesting questions related to this problem. The first one covers dynamical aspects of the phase transition, while the second group deals with symmetric properties of the ground state (and excitations) in different phases. In the context of our discussion a typical question from the

626: first group looks like the following: what does temperature

627: deconfinement phase transition correspond to in terms of correlators?

628: The second group provides questions like: where is screening of zero

629: $N$-ality charges at large distances hidden in the expression

630: (\ref{nast})? We have no possibility to discuss these important issues

631: in the present review and refer the reader to original literature and

632: references therein  (see review \cite{i6}).

633: 

634: 

635: 

636: 

637: \section{Mechanism of confinement and dual Meissner effect}

638: \subsection{Effective fields definition}

639: 

640: The formalism considered so far allows one to perform the expansion of Wilson

641: loop  \rf{nast} and  static potential  \rf{ev36} over

642: the full set of field correlators \rf{ev9884}, \rf{ev9885}, \rf{ew1},

643: \rf{expon} in the whole range of distances. In what follows we will use

644: these results to calculate the effective confining field in hadrons and study

645: some of its phenomenological applications\footnote{Dynamics of effective

646: fields is considered in \cite{D1}, \cite{D2}}.

647: 

648: 

649: It is well-known that the static potential at small quark-antiquark distances 

650: $r\ll \Lambda_{QCD}$ in Born approximation of perturbation theory has the form

651: \be

652: V^{\mr{Coul}}(r)=-\fr{C_F \alpha_s}{r},

653: \lb{V1}

654: \ee

655: where $C_F=4/3$ is the quadratic Casimir operator in fundamental

656: representation. The color factor  $C_F$ is the only difference between this

657: potential and Coulomb one in electrodynamics. One can introduce the field

658: \be

659: \vecE^\mr{Coul}= \vnabla V^\mr{Coul}(r),

660: \lb{V2}

661: \ee

662: which has the meaning of the force acting on the quark. 

663: 

664: Let us define the effective field as follows,

665: \be

666: {\cal F}^J_{\mu\nu}(x) =

667: \lan \T W(C) \rrr^{-1} \lan \T ig G_{\mu\nu}(x,x_0) W(C)

668: \rrr.

669: \label{F}

670: \ee

671: Index $J$ stresses that the field ${\cal F}^J_{\mu\nu}(x)$ is the

672: functional of the external current $J$ corresponding to W-loop $W(C)$.

673: It will be demonstrated in the next section that this effective field at small

674: distances is reduced to color-Coulomb field  \rf{V1}, \rf{V2}.

675: 

676: Notice that one can write down the effective field using the {\it

677:   connected probe} \cite{dig5} $\lan \T W(C,C_P) \rrr$, where

678: \be

679: W(C,C_P)=W({C_P},x)\Phi(x,x_0)\Phi(x_0,z)

680: W(C,z)\Phi(z,x_0)\Phi(x_0,x)

681: \label{F2}

682: \ee 

683: is the W-loop with the contour consisting of the (small) probe

684: contour  $C_P$ connected with the contour $C$ along some trajectory

685: going through the point $x_0$.

686: This quantity depends on the position of the "reference point" $x_0$ as well as on the shape of 

687: the trajectory

688: connecting $C$ and $C_P$. We will choose the trajectory going along the shortest path from point $x$ to

689: the minimal surface of the W-loop, see Fig. 1.

690: 

691: The effective field in the case of probe contour $C_P$ with the infinitesimal

692: surface    $\delta \sigma_{\mu\nu}$  can be written as

693: \be

694: {\cal F}^J_{\mu\nu}(x)\,\delta \sigma_{\mu\nu}(x)=

695: \lan \T W(C) \rrr^{-1}\lt(\lan \T W(C,C_P) \rrr-

696: \lan \T W(C) \rrr\rt)\equiv \tilde M(C,C_P)

697: \label{F3}

698: \ee 

699: In particular, if the probe contour has a size $a\times a$, 

700: the relation for the electric field follows,

701:  \be

702: \ven\cdot \vecE^J(x)=\fr{\tilde M(C,C_P)}{a^2},

703: \label{F4}

704: \ee

705: where $\ven$ is the unit vector defining the orientation of probe contour

706: in coordinate space\footnote{Let us remind in this context the expression for the moment of

707: forces acting on the frame with the electric current $I$

708: in the magnetic field $\veB$, known from the general physics. Namely, 

709: when the frame is oriented in the

710: plane ($\ven^{(1)}$, $\ven^{(2)}$) and $\ven^{(1)}$ is chosen

711: orthogonal to magnetic field, the moment of acting forces $M$ takes the form

712: $

713: \ven^{(2)}\cdot \vecB=\fr{M}{a^2},

714: \label{F5}

715: $

716: where $\vecB\equiv I~\veB$. Comparing this relation with \rf{F5} one sees

717: that $\tilde M(C,C_P)$ defined in \rf{F3} means the "dual" moment of acting forces.}.

718: 

719: \subsection{Definition of effective currents}

720: 

721: In abelian theory

722: $G_{\mu\nu}(x,x_0)\equiv F_{\mu\nu}(x)$ and equation

723: \rf{F} defines field distribution satisfying  

724: Maxwell equations with the external electric

725: current $g^2 J_{\mu}(x) = g^2\int_C dz_{\mu}\delta^{(4)}(z-x)$

726: \be

727: \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{\rho}} {\cal F}^J_{\rho\mu}(x) = g^2 

728: J_{\mu}(x)

729: \label{uyi}

730: \ee

731: where $g$ denotes  the electric charge. Let us now proceed with the 

732: nonabelian case.

733: Using the differential relations for phase factors (see, e.g.,

734:  \cite{nast1} - \cite{nast6}), one can formally write down

735:  the effective "electric" and "magnetic" currents as

736:  $$

737:  j_{\nu}^J(x) =  \lan \T W(C) \rrr^{-1} \left\{ \vphantom{\int_0^1 ds \frac{\partial u_{\alpha}(s,x)}{\partial s}

738: \frac{\partial u_{\beta}(s,x)}{\partial x_{\mu}} }

739: \lan \T \Phi(x_0;x) ig D_{\mu}F_{\mu\nu}(x)\Phi(x;x_0) W(C) \rrr \right.

740: $$

741: \be

742: \left. + g^2 \int_0^1 ds \frac{\partial u_{\alpha}(s,x)}{\partial s}

743: \frac{\partial u_{\beta}(s,x)}{\partial x_{\mu}} \lan \T

744: [G_{\alpha\beta}(u,x_0) G_{\mu\nu}(x,x_0) ] W(C) \rrr \right\}

745: \label{ew92}

746: \ee

747: $$

748: k_{\nu}^J(x) = g^2 \lan \T W(C) \rrr^{-1}\times

749: $$

750: \be

751:  \int_0^1 ds 

752: \frac{\partial u_{\alpha}(s,x)}{\partial s} 

753: \frac{\partial u_{\beta}(s,x)}{\partial x_{\mu}} \lan 

754: \T  [G_{\alpha\beta}(u,x_0) {\tilde G}_{\mu\nu}(x,x_0) ]\> W(C) \rrr

755: \label{k1}

756: \ee   

757: where the integration contour  is given by the function $u_{\mu}(s,x)$ 

758: with the boundary conditions

759:  $u^\mu(0,x)=x_0^\mu$,  $u_\mu(1,x)=x_\mu$ and square brackets

760: denote commutators in color space.    

761: Index $J$ indicates that the "electric" current

762:  $j^J_{\mu}$ and "magnetic" one $k^J_{\mu}$ are functionals

763:  of the external current $J$ given by the W-loop. The currents 

764: defined in such a way 

765: can now be considered as sources of effective "electric" and "magnetic"

766: fields according to effective "Maxwell equations"

767: \be

768: \frac{1}{2}\>\epsilon_{\mu\rho\alpha\beta}

769: \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{\rho}} {\cal F}^J_{\alpha\beta}(x) =

770: k^J_{\mu}(x)\>\>\>\>; \>\>\>\>\>\>

771: \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{\rho}} {\cal

772: F}^J_{\rho\mu}(x) = j^J_{\mu}(x),

773: \label{Meq}

774: \ee

775: %We have used the same symbol ${{\cal{F}}}^J_{\mu\nu}(x)$ 

776: %in the left hand side of (\ref{Meq}) and in (\ref{F}) 

777: %by purpose since it can be 

778: %shown that the effective field defined by (\ref{F}) identically satisfies 

779: %(\ref{Meq}). 

780: 

781: Equations (\ref{ew92}) and (\ref{k1}) define effective currents which

782: satisfy (\ref{Meq}) with the definition (\ref{F}) identically.

783: Notice that in (\ref{k1})

784: nonabelian Bianchi identities $D_{\mu}{\tilde F}_{\mu\nu}(x) =0$ 

785: respecting the gauge nature of QCD are used.

786:   It is obvious from  \rf{Meq} that both electric and magnetic

787:   effective currents are conserved 

788: since tensor ${\cal F}_{\mu\nu}$ is antisymmetric.

789: 

790: Let us note that the lowest term of the W-loop expansion,

791: which contributes    to    $k_{\mu}^J(x)$  (\ref{k1}), is proportional to

792: nonabelian field strength    correlator of third order.

793: Therefore the value of magnetic current is

794: proportional to correlator

795: $\lan E^a_iB^b_jE^c_k\rrr f^{abc}\epsilon_{ijk}$,

796: i.e. the effective magnetic current emerges due to the nonabelian

797: emittence of the colormagnetic field by the colorelectric one \cite{i4}.

798: The averages of the type $\lan  \T  G_{\alpha\beta}(x,x_0)

799:     G_{\gamma\delta}(y,x_0)\, W(C) \rrr$ in rhs of \rf{ew92}, \rf{k1}

800: define the nonlocal gluon condensate in the presence of W-loop,

801: which saturates to the constant value far from the W-loop.    

802: We do not address here an interesting question about possible microscopic 

803: nature of the currents (\ref{ew92}), (\ref{k1}), in particular, the question

804: to what extent the magnetic current (\ref{k1}) may be understood as

805: corresponding to some propagating point-like particles, "abelian monopoles".

806: Instead, we take  (\ref{ew92}), (\ref{k1}) as primary effective definitions.

807: 

808: If the gauge coupling is small, one can use

809:  for the electric current \rf{ew92}

810: the equation of classical gluodynamics,

811: \be

812: ig D_\mu F^a_{\mu\nu}=g^2\,J_\nu^a ,

813: \lb{j2}

814: \ee

815: where $J_{\mu}^a(x) =J_{\mu}(x)T^a$, ~

816: $J_{\mu}(x) =\int_C dz_{\mu} \delta^{(4)}(z-x)$.

817: In the leading order in gauge coupling $\alpha_s=g^2/(4\pi)$

818: the second term of \rf{ew92} does not contribute, and  the expression

819: for the electric current reads as

820: \be

821: j_{\nu}^J(x) = 4\pi C_F \alpha_s\, J_\nu(x),

822: \lb{j3}

823: \ee

824: i.e. it has a form of classical current of electrodynamics

825: with the charge $C_F \alpha_s$. In particular case

826: of static quark and antiquark Maxwell equation with this current reproduces the

827: color-Coulomb potential \rf{V1}.

828: 

829: 

830: 

831: 

832: \subsection{Effective fields distribution in two-point approximation}

833: 

834: Let us consider the rectangular W-loop of static quark and antiquark.

835: Relying on the  hypothesis of bilocal (gaussian) dominance  we take

836: into account of only the bilocal correlator

837: contribution to the effective fields

838: assuming that higher correlators do  not lead to

839: essential modification of the confinement picture. The effective field in

840: bilocal approximation reads 

841: \be

842: {\cal F}_{\mu\nu}(x)=\int_{S}

843: d\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(y)\, g^2 D^{(2)}_{\alpha\beta\mu\nu}(x-y),

844: \lb{3.4}

845: \ee

846: where $y\in S$,~ $S$ is the minimal surface of the W-loop, and bilocal

847: correlator $D^{(2)}$ is defined in \rf{ew1}.

848: 

849: 

850: Let us denote $\ven=\veR/R$ the unit vector directed from quark to antiquark

851: and rewrite \rf{3.4} in the form

852: \be

853: {\cal F}_{\mu\nu}(x)=\int_S d^2 y\,\T

854: \left\lan gF_{\mu\nu}(x)\Phi(x,y) \ven g\veE(y)\Phi(y,x) \right\rrr,

855: \lb{3.5}

856: \ee

857: which clearly indicates that the magnetic field ${\cal B}$ is absent.

858: The substitution of parametrization \rf{ew1} for \rf{3.5} yields the following

859: expression for the effective electric field,

860: \be

861: {\cal E}_i(\ver,\veR)=n_k\int\limits_0^R

862: dl\int\limits_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt \lt(\delta_{ik}D(z)+\fr12

863: \fr{\partial z_i D_1(z)}{\partial z_k} \rt),

864: \lb{Edist}

865: \ee

866: where $z=(\ver-\ven l,t)$.

867: The perturbative part of the field 

868: corresponding to the contribution of the formfactor $D_1$

869:  to  \rf{Edist} can be represented as the difference

870: \be

871: \vecE^{D_1,\mr{oge}}(\ver)=

872: \vecE^\mr{Coul}(\ver)-\vecE^\mr{Coul}(\ver-\veR),

873: \lb{3.8}

874: \ee

875: where $\vecE^\mr{Coul}(\ver)$ is the color-Coulomb field \rf{V1}, \rf{V2},

876: \be

877: \vecE^\mr{Coul}(\ver)=\fr{C_F\alpha_s \ver}{r^3}.

878: \lb{3.10}

879: \ee

880: The corresponding formfactor,

881: \be

882: D^\mr{oge}_1(z)=\fr{4C_F\alpha_s}{\pi z^4},

883: \lb{3.11}

884: \ee

885: can also be calculated directly in perturbation theory \cite{Shevchenko}.

886: 

887: It was discussed in previous chapter  that the confinement is the consequence

888: of stochastic nature of gluon field fluctuations, which reveal themselves

889: at separations of the order of the correlation length $\lambda$ and lead to the

890: exponential fall off of the field correlators, see \rf{expon}.

891: One can show that since at large separations the string acts on quark with

892: the force $\sigma$, the formfactor $D$ should be normalized according to

893: \be

894: D(z^2) = \fr{\sigma}{\pi \lambda^2} \exp\left(-\frac{|z|}{\lambda}\right).

895: \lb{3.12}

896: \ee

897: On substituting \rf{3.12} for \rf{Edist} one calculates the corresponding field,

898: \be

899: {\cal \vecE}^D(\ver,\veR)=\ven\, \fr{2\sigma}{\pi}

900: \int\limits_0^{R/\lambda} dl\, \lt| l\ven-\frac\ver{\lambda}\rt|

901: K_1\lt(\lt| l\ven-\frac\ver{\lambda}\rt|\rt),

902: \lb{3.13}

903: \ee

904: where $K_1$ is the McDonald function.

905: The string tension $\sigma$ can be considered as a scale QCD parameter

906: (it is related to $\Lambda_{\mr{QCD}}$ through equation \rf{3.27}).

907: Numerical value $\sigma\approx 0.18$ GeV$^2$ is determined phenomenologically

908: from the slope of the meson Regge trajectory, see e.g. \cite{hyb1}.

909: It is easy to verify that if the point $x$ is placed at the symmetry axes, the

910: relation between the field ${\cal \vecE}^D$ and the nonperturbative part of

911: the static potential corresponding to formfactor $D$ (\ref{ev960}),

912: \rf{ev36}, which we denote  $V^D$, reads

913: \be

914: \vecE^D(0,\veR)=\vnabla V^{D}(R).

915: \lb{3.13b}

916: \ee

917: 

918: The distribution of the field $|\vecE(x_1,0,x_3)|$ \rf{Edist}

919: is shown in Fig. 2 at $Q\bar Q$-separation 2 fm.

920: One can see at the figure the peaks of the color-Coulomb field \rf{3.10} over the quark and antiquark,

921: and the string \rf{3.13}  between them, with the universal profile ${\cal E}(\rho)$,

922: \be

923: {\cal E}(\rho)=2\sigma \lt(1+\fr{\rho}{\lambda}\rt)

924: \exp\lt(-\fr{\rho}{\lambda}\rt),

925: \lb{profE}

926: \ee

927: where $\rho$ is the distance to the $Q\bar Q$ axis.

928: 

929: 

930: \subsection{Magnetic currents distribution and Londons equation}

931: 

932: To perform more detailed analysis of the magnetic currents distribution

933:  \rf{k1} in the case of static quark and antiquark let us apply

934: the first Maxwell equation  \rf{Meq} to the electric field in bilocal

935: approximation \rf{Edist}, \rf{3.10}, \rf{3.13}. Then one

936: can seethat the magnetic current $\vek$ has a form

937: \be

938: \vek=\rot\, \vecE,

939: \label{k}

940: \ee

941: while the magnetic charge is absent.

942: It is clear that the perturbative color-Coulomb field \rf{V2} does not contribute to \rf{k}.

943: A nonperturbative field  \rf{3.13} is directed along the quark-antiquark axis,

944: therefore magnetic current winds around the axis. In particular case of the saturated string \rf{profE}

945:  the polar component of the magnetic current  $k_\varphi$ takes a form

946: \be

947: k_\varphi(\rho)=-\fr{2\sigma \rho}{\lambda^2}

948: \exp\lt(-\fr{\rho}{\lambda}\rt).

949: \lb{profk}

950: \ee

951: One can see that the value of the current rises linearly near the axis and falls exponentially at large distances from it.

952: 

953: The vector distribution of magnetic currents in the case

954: of $Q\bar Q$-separation $R=2$ fm is shown in Fig. 3.

955: This distribution resembles the one of the electric superconducting

956: currents around the Abrikosov string in superconductors

957: \cite{ano1}, and is another hint in favor of dual 

958: superconductivity mechanism of confinement \cite{ano2}.

959: An exponential behavior of current and field at large distances means that

960: the dual Londons equation

961: \be

962: \rot~\vek=\lambda^{-2}\vecE

963: \lb{Me1}

964: \ee

965: is satisfied.

966: Indeed, the only component of the polar vector

967: $k_\varphi$ \rf{profk} is directed along z axes and has a form

968: \be

969: (\rot~\vek)_z(\rho)=\fr{1}{\rho}

970: \fr{\partial\rho k_\varphi}{\partial\rho}=

971: \gamma(\rho)\,\lambda^{-2}{\cal E}(\rho),

972: \lb{Me2}

973: \ee

974: where the universal profile ${\cal E}(\rho)$ is defined in

975: \rf{profE}, and function

976: \be

977: \gamma(\rho)=\fr{-2+\rho/\lambda}{1+\rho/\lambda}

978: \lb{Me3}

979: \ee

980: rises monotonically from $-2$ and at $\rho\gg \lambda$ tends to unity as

981: $\gamma(\rho)\approx 1-3\lambda/\rho$.

982: 

983: One concludes that the confinement mechanism is related to

984: cyclic magnetic currents \rf{profk} squeezing the electric field

985: into the tube of string with the exponential fall off outside it,

986: and satisfying the dual Londons equation \rf{Me2}, \rf{Me3}.

987: 

988: 

989: \subsection{Vacuum polarization and screening of the coupling constant}

990: We turn now

991: to the second Maxwell equation for the static quark and antiquark, the

992: Gauss law

993: \be

994: \dv\,\vecE=\rho,

995: \lb{3.6.1}

996: \ee

997: where the field $\vecE$ \rf{Edist} is the sum

998: \be

999: \vecE=\vecE^{D_1,\mr{oge}}+\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}+\vecE^D,

1000: \lb{3.6.2}

1001: \ee

1002: and $\vecE^{D_1,\mr{oge}}$, $\vecE^D$ are defined in \rf{3.8},

1003: \rf{3.10},\rf{3.13}, while the nonperturbative field 

1004: $\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}$ ensures the exponential fall-off of the formfactor

1005: $D_1$ at large distances. In this section we introduce additional

1006: assumption about charge distribution.

1007: This assumption is confirmed {\it a posteriori} by the lattice

1008: results in abelian projected gauge theory

1009: (compare e.g. the distributions of effective field and its

1010: nonperturbative part  along $Q\bar Q$ axis in Figs. 6,7 with

1011: corresponding distributions in Fig. 21 from paper \cite{B}).

1012: We assume that the nonperturbative

1013: contributions to the charge density cancel,

1014: \be

1015: \dv\,\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}=-\dv\,\vecE^D,

1016: \label{3.6.6}

1017: \ee

1018: so that the charge density has a form

1019: \be

1020: \rho=4\pi C_F \alpha_s\,(\delta(\ver)-

1021:  \delta(\ver-\veR)).

1022: \label{3.6.5}

1023: \ee

1024: Using explicit expression for the field $\vecE^D$  \rf{3.13}, we

1025: find from \rf{3.6.6}  the ``screening'' charge density

1026: $\tilde \rho(r)$,

1027: \be

1028: \dv\,\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}=\tilde \rho(r)-\tilde \rho(|\ver-\veR|),

1029: \label{3.6.7}

1030: \ee

1031: \be

1032: \tilde \rho (r)=-\fr{2\sigma}{\pi \lambda^2}\,r\,

1033: K_1\lt(\fr{r}{\lambda}\rt).

1034: \label{3.6.8}

1035: \ee

1036: Relying on \rf{3.6.7},  \rf{3.6.8}, one calculates  the field

1037: $\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}$,

1038: \be

1039: \vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}=\fr{\tilde Q(r)\,\ver}{r^3}-

1040: \fr{{\tilde Q}(|\ver-\veR|)\,(\ver-\veR)}{|\ver-\veR|^3},

1041: \label{3.6.9}

1042: \ee

1043: where $\tilde Q$ is the ``screening'' charge,

1044: \be

1045: \tilde Q(r)=

1046: \fr{2\sigma \lambda^2}{\pi}

1047: \int_0^{r/\lambda}x^3\,K_1(x)dx,

1048: \label{3.6.11}

1049: \ee

1050: It is obvious that there is no field at large distances from quark

1051: and antiquark due to confinement, and the full charge

1052:  $Q(r)$ defined as

1053: \be

1054: Q(r)= C_F\alpha_s(r)-\tilde Q(r),

1055: \label{3.26}

1056: \ee

1057: turns to zero. The condition $\lt.Q(r)\rt|_{r\to \infty}=0$ leads to the

1058: relation \cite{rep3}

1059: \be

1060: C_F\alpha_s=3\sigma \lambda^2

1061: \label{3.27a}

1062: \ee

1063: between the strong coupling at large distances and

1064: parameters $\sigma, \lambda$ responsible for confinement.

1065: The behavior of the charge $Q(r)$ at standard values $\sigma=0.18$ GeV$^2$,

1066: $\lambda=0.2$ fm and constant value $\alpha_s=0.42$ calculated from \rf{3.27a}

1067: is shown in Fig. 4. The mean radius of the screening according to the figure

1068: is of the order of 0.5 fm.

1069: 

1070:  The behavior of the strong coupling taking into account the background

1071: confining fields was studied in  \cite{BPT5,BPT6} in the framework of the

1072: background perturbation theory. It was shown that the confining background

1073: leads to the modification of the logarithmic running of coupling according to

1074: $\alpha_s(q^2)\to \alpha_s(q^2+m_B^2)$, where the "background mass"

1075: $m_B\approx 1$ GeV$\approx \lambda^{-1}$ is related to the

1076: energy of the valence gluon

1077: excitation and the gluon correlation length. One can see that  at large

1078: distances $r\gg \lambda$ the background coupling tends to constant

1079: ("freezes"), while at small ones it turns to the running coupling of the

1080: ordinary perturbation theory.

1081: The relation between parameters now takes the form

1082: \be

1083: C_F\alpha_s(\lambda)=3\sigma \lambda^2,

1084: \label{3.27}

1085: \ee

1086: where $\alpha_s(\lambda)$ is the freezing value of background coupling equal to

1087: the ordinary running coupling at scale $\lambda$. This equation relates two

1088: alternative scale parameters of quantum theory, $\Lambda_{\mr{QCD}}$ and

1089: the string tension $\sigma$\footnote{It was shown in

1090: \cite{alpha1} that the value $\Lambda_{\mr{QCD}}=241$ MeV computed in lattice

1091: \cite{Capitan} in $\bar \mr{MS}$ regularization scheme with $n_f=0$ corresponds to the

1092: freezing value  $\alpha_s(\lambda)=0.42$, the latter being in complete

1093: agreement with \rf{3.27}.}.

1094: 

1095: In Fig. 5 the background running coupling is shown

1096: by dotted curve. The behavior of the running charge  $Q^{\mr{run}}(r)$

1097:  is shown by solid curve. As one can see from the figure, the effective charge has

1098:  a maximum at $r\approx 0.3$ fm.

1099: 

1100: Using standard values $\sigma=0.18$ GeV$^2$,

1101: $\lambda=0.2$ fm and constant value  $\alpha_s=0.42$ we plot the following

1102: field distributions. In Fig. 6 the projections of fields $\vecE^D(0,0,x_3)$,

1103: $\vecE(0,0,x_3)$  and  $\vecE^{D_1,\mr{oge}}(0,0,x_3)$

1104: into the quark-antiquark axis are

1105: shown. Note that  the fields  $\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}$ and

1106: $\vecE^{D_1,\mr{oge}}$ cancel in the middle of

1107: the string. In Fig. 7 the  projections of fields  $\vecE^D(0,0,x_3)$, 

1108: $\vecE^D(0,0,x_3) +\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}(0,0,x_3)$ and  $\vecE(0,0,x_3)$ 

1109: onto the quark-antiquark axis are plotted. In Fig. 8 the vector

1110: distribution of the displacement field $\vecE(x_1,0,x_3)$ is shown 

1111: demonstrating that the field is squeezed in tube with the width of the 

1112: order of $\lambda$. In Fig. 9 the vector distribution of the solenoid 

1113: field $\vecE^D(x_1,0,x_3) +\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}(x_1,0,x_3)$ is plotted.

1114: 

1115: It is convenient to define the isotropic dielectric function 

1116: $\varepsilon(r)$,

1117: \be

1118: \varepsilon(r)=\fr{Q(r)}{C_F\alpha_s(r)}.

1119: \lb{3.33}

1120: \ee

1121: One can calculate that at large distances $r\gg \lambda$ it is

1122: exponentially small,

1123: \be

1124: \lt.\varepsilon(r)\rt|_{r\to\infty}=

1125: \fr{\sqrt{\pi}}{2}\lt(\fr{r}{\lambda}\rt)^{5/2}

1126: \exp\left(-\fr{r}{\lambda}\right),

1127: \lb{3.35}

1128: \ee

1129: indicating the disappearence of the color-Coulomb field both inside and

1130: outside the string.

1131: 

1132: \section{Hadrons with three static sources}

1133: \subsection{Green functions and W-loops}

1134: Physical hadrons are nonlocal extended objects, therefore to construct

1135: their Green functions one should use nonlocal quark and gluon operators 

1136: \be

1137: q^i(x,Y)\equiv q^j(x) \Phi^i_j(x,Y),

1138: \lb{4.1}

1139: \ee 

1140: \be

1141: g_a(x,Y)\equiv g_b(x) \Phi_{ab} (x,Y),

1142: \label{4.2}

1143: \ee

1144: as well as the local one

1145: $G^j_i(x) \equiv  g_a(x) t^{(a)j}_i$.

1146: Here and in what follows $i,j,...=1,2,3$ are color indexes in

1147: fundamental representation, and $a,b,...=1,..,8$ in adjoint one;

1148: $g_a$ denotes the valence gluon operator of background perturbation 

1149: theory \cite{BPT5,BPT6}, and $G^j_i(x)$ transforms as

1150: $G_i^j\to U^{+j}_{{}j'}G_{i'}^{j'}U^{i'}_{i}$

1151: under gauge transformations.

1152: One can construct gauge invariant combinations of these operators using

1153: symmetric tensors $\delta_i^j,~ \delta^{ab},~ d^{abc}$ and

1154: antisymmetric ones $e_{ijk}$,  $f^{abc}$,

1155: \be

1156: B_Y(x,y,z,Y) =

1157: e_{ijk}q^i(x,Y)

1158: q^j(y,Y)q^k(z,Y),

1159: \label{4.4}

1160: \ee

1161: \be

1162:  G^{(f)}_Y(x,y,z,Y)=f^{abc}g_a(x,Y) g_b(y,Y) g_c(z,Y),

1163: \label{4.5}

1164:  \ee

1165: \be

1166:  G^{(d)}_Y(x,y,z,Y)=d^{abc}g_a(x,Y) g_b(y,Y) g_c(z,Y),

1167: \label{4.53}

1168:  \ee

1169: \be

1170: G_\Delta(x,y,z) =G_i^j (x) \Phi_j^k(x,y)

1171: G_k^l(y) \Phi_l^m (y,z) G_m

1172: ^n(z) \Phi_n^i(z,x).

1173: \label{4.6}

1174: \ee

1175: First three constructions have a structure of $Y$-type with the

1176: string junction at point $Y$, where the color indexes are contracted 

1177: with the (anti-) symmetric tensor, and the latter one has

1178: a structure of triangular type. Let us stress that the wave function of 

1179: triangular type is possible only for glueballs but not

1180: for baryons, see \cite{hadrons}.

1181: 

1182: Hadron Green function has a form

1183: \be

1184: {\cal G}_i(\bar X, X)=\lan \Psi^+ _i(\bar X)\Psi_i(X)\rrr,

1185: \label{4.7}

1186: \ee

1187: where $\Psi_i=G_\Delta, G_Y, B_Y;~X=x,y,z$ in the case of $G_\Delta$ and

1188:  $x,y,z,Y$ for $Y$-states.

1189:  The vacuum average $\lan...\rrr$ leads

1190:  to the product of Green functions  of quarks or valence gluons,

1191:  which are proportional to the parallel transporters,

1192: $$

1193: \lan \bar q_j (\bar x) q^i(x)\rrr\sim

1194: \Phi_j^i (\bar x, x),

1195: $$

1196: \be

1197:  \lan  g_a(\bar x) g_b(x)\rrr\sim \Phi_{ab}(\bar x, x).

1198: \label{4.8}

1199: \ee

1200: Therefore the hadron Green function is proportional to the W-loop of

1201: this hadron, see equation \rf{ev157}, and is reduced to the W-loop in

1202: the case of static sources. W-loops of baryon and $Y$-type glueball

1203: take forms correspondingly

1204: \be

1205: {\cal W}_B=\frac16 \lan  \epsilon_{ijk}

1206: \epsilon^{i 'j 'k '}

1207: \Phi^{i}_{i '}(C_1)\Phi^{j}_{j '}(C_2)

1208: \Phi^{k}_{k '}(C_3)\rrr,

1209: \lb{4.9}

1210: \ee

1211: \be

1212: {\cal W}_G^{Y,f}=\frac1{24}\lan f^{abc} f^{a'b'c'}

1213: \Phi^{aa'}(C_1)\Phi^{bb'}(C_2)

1214: \Phi^{cc'}(C_3)\rrr,

1215: \lb{4.10}

1216: \ee

1217: \be

1218: {\cal W}_G^{Y,d}=\frac3{40}\lan d^{abc} d^{a'b'c'}

1219: \Phi^{aa'}(C_1)\Phi^{bb'}(C_2)

1220: \Phi^{cc'}(C_3)\rrr.

1221: \lb{4.11}

1222: \ee

1223: Trajectories $C_i$ formed by the sources are shown in Fig. 10.

1224: A W-loop of $\Delta$-type glueball at large distances 

1225: can be represented as a product of three meson W-loops \cite{hadrons}, 

1226: \be

1227: {\cal W}_G^\Delta(X,\bar X)=W(\bar x,\bar y|x,y)

1228: W(\bar y,\bar z|y,z) W(\bar z,\bar x|z,x).

1229: \lb{4.12}

1230: \ee

1231: Corresponding contours are shown in Fig. 11.

1232: 

1233: \subsection{Static potentials}

1234: Static potentials of hadrons with three static sources  are calculated

1235:  in bilocal approximation of the field correlator method

1236:  \cite{hadrons,Vpot}

1237:    in the same way as meson ones\footnote{The effect of charge screening

1238: is taken into account in \cite{talk}}. For hadrons of $Y$-type let us denote

1239: $\ven^{(a)}$ the unit vector directed from the string junction to the

1240: $a$-th quark and $R_a$ the separation between this quark and the string

1241: junction. The potential in baryon reads

1242: \be

1243: V_B(R_1,R_2,R_3)=

1244: \left(\sum_{a=b}-\sum_{a<b}\right)n_i^{(a)}n_j^{(b)}\int_0^{R_a}\int_0

1245: ^{R_b } d l\,d l' \int_0^\infty  d t\, {\cal D}_{i4,j4}(z_{ab}),

1246: \lb{4.13}

1247: \ee

1248: where $z_{ab}=(l\,\ven^{(a)}-l'\ven^{(b)},t)$.

1249: One can represent this potential in the form

1250: \be

1251: V_B=V^{c}+V^d+V^{\mr{nd}},

1252: \lb{4.13a}

1253: \ee

1254: where $V^{c}$ is the color-Coulomb potential

1255: \be

1256: V^{c}= -\fr{C_F \alpha_s}2 \sum_{i<j}\fr1{r_{ij}},

1257: \lb{4.13b}

1258: \ee

1259: $r_{ij}$ is the $i$-th and $j$-th quark separation.

1260: We will take into account the charge screening replacing

1261: in \rf{4.13b} $C_F \alpha_s$ with $Q$ defined in

1262:  \rf{3.26}, \rf{3.6.11}. Terms $V^d$ and $V^{\mr{nd}}$ denote

1263:  the diagonal and nondiagonal parts of the potential

1264:  corresponding to the correlator $D$; $V^d$ is determined

1265:  by the first and  $V^{\mr{nd}}$ by the second sum in \rf{4.13}.

1266: One can find explicit expressions for  $V^d$ and $V^{\mr{nd}}$

1267: in \cite{Vpot}. We just note here that  $V^d$ is a sum of

1268: quark-antiquark potentials $V^D$ (\ref{ev960}), \rf{ev36},

1269: \be

1270: V^d(R_1,R_2,R_3)=\sum_a V^D(R_a).

1271: \lb{4.13c}

1272: \ee

1273: Characteristic feature of the potential \rf{4.13} is an increase of

1274: its slope when the source separations are increasing. In Fig. 12

1275: the behavior of the baryon potential with the color-Coulomb part 

1276: subtracted is shown in comparison with the lattice data \cite{Tak} as a 

1277: function of the total length of baryon string $L=\sum_a R_a$. A tangent 

1278: with the slope $\sigma$ is shown by points. One can see from the figure 

1279: that the potential slope becomes significantly less than $\sigma$ at 

1280: $L\la 1$ fm. This effect is induced by the influence of the correlation 

1281: length of confining fields \cite{Vpot}. In Fig. 13 a dependence of the

1282: baryon potential in equilateral triangle on the quark separation is given 

1283: in comparison with the lattice data \cite{deF}. Note the agreement

1284: between analytic and lattice calculations within the accuracy of a few 

1285: tens MeV.

1286: For the $Y$-glueball potential the Casimir scaling holds,

1287: \be

1288: \fr{V_G^Y}{V_B}=\fr{C_8}{C_3},

1289: \lb{4.14}

1290: \ee

1291: where  $C_3=(N_c^2-1)/2N_c\equiv C_F$ and $C_8=N_c$ are quadratic

1292: Casimir operators in fundamental and adjoint representations.

1293: 

1294: A potential in  $\Delta$-glueball in the case of equilateral triangle

1295: with the side $r$ has a form \cite{hadrons}

1296: \be

1297: V_G^\Delta(r)=\fr{C_8}{C_3}V^{c}(r)+V^d(r)-

1298: 2V^{\mr{nd}}(r).

1299: \lb{4.15}

1300: \ee

1301: Let us note that $V^d$ and $V^{\mr{nd}}$  depend on the valence gluons

1302: separation but not on the separation between the gluon and the center of 

1303: the triangle, and that the term $-2V^{\mr{nd}}$ corresponds to the 

1304: interaction of three effective quark-antiquark W-loops.

1305: The behavior of the potentials $V_G^Y$ and $V_G^\Delta$

1306: in equilateral triangle in dependence on the source  separation

1307: $r$ is shown in Fig. 14. The potential  $V_G^Y$ goes above

1308: the   $V_G^\Delta$ because of the positive contribution of nondiagonal 

1309: term $V^{\mr{nd}}$ to $Y$-type glueball and negative to triangular one, 

1310: as well as for the greater slope of diagonal term $V^d$ in the case of

1311: $Y$-glueball.

1312: 

1313: \subsection{Fields distributions}

1314:   The field in baryon is defined  \cite{rep3} as the square average

1315:  \be

1316: (\vecE^{(B)})^2=\frac23\, \lt((\vecE^B_{(1)})^2

1317: +(\vecE^B_{(2)})^2+(\vecE^B_{(3)})^2\rt)

1318: \lb{4.16}

1319: \ee

1320: of fields $\vecE^B_{(i)}$  calculated for the probe plaquette

1321: joint to the trajectory $C_i$,

1322: \be

1323: \vecE^B_{(1)}(\vex,\veR^{(1)},\veR^{(2)},\veR^{(3)})=

1324: \vecE^M(\vex,\veR^{(1)})-\frac12\,

1325: \vecE^M(\vex,\veR^{(2)})-\frac12\,\vecE^M(\vex,\veR^{(3)}).

1326: \lb{4.17}

1327: \ee

1328: Normalizing coefficient 2/3 in \rf{4.16} is chosen due to the

1329: condition that at large separations the field acting on quarks equals

1330: to $\sigma$. According to \rf{4.16}, \rf{4.17}, the field in baryon

1331:  is expressed through fields of effective quark-antiquark pairs, with

1332:  positions of antiquarks coinciding with the string junction.

1333: The distribution of the field  $\vecE^{(B)}$ taking into account

1334: only the contribution of formfactor $D$ is shown in Figs. 15 and 16

1335: in the plane of quarks forming an equilateral triangle with the side

1336: 1 fm and 3.5 fm respectively. One can see in Fig. 16 three

1337: plateau with the saturated profile, and small growth of the field

1338: around the string junction point, the relative difference of values

1339: amounts to 1/16. A surface formed by the confining field with the value

1340: $\sigma$ is shown in Fig. 17 for quark separations 1 fm. One can see 

1341: the small convexity in the region of the string junction.

1342: 

1343: A field in  $\Delta$-type glueball is a sum of meson fields with

1344: gluon pairs acting as the effective sources \cite{rep3},

1345: \be

1346: \vecE_\Delta^{(G)}(\vex,\ver^{(1)},\ver^{(2)},\ver^{(3

1347: )})=

1348: \sum_{i=1}^3 \vecE^M(\vex-\ver^{(i)},

1349: \ver^{(i+1)\mr{mod3}}-\ver^{(i)}),

1350: \lb{4.18}

1351: \ee

1352: where $\ver^{(i)}$ denotes the position of $i$-th valence gluon.

1353: In Fig. 18 the field distribution $|\vecE_\Delta^{(G)}(\vex)|$

1354: in valence gluon plane is shown at gluon separations 1 fm, and

1355: in Fig. 19 the surface $|\vecE_\Delta^{(G)}(\vex)|=\sigma$ is plotted 

1356: for the same gluon separations. Let us note that according to

1357:  \rf{3.13b} one can calculate the static quark-antiquark potential

1358:  as the work of the force acting on the quark, done on separating the 

1359: latter from the antiquark to the distance $R$. Analogous relation are 

1360: valid for the field and potential of 

1361:  $\Delta$-type glueball, see  \rf{4.15}, \rf{4.18}.

1362: It is clear that the nondiagonal part of the $\Delta$-glueball potential

1363:  $V^{\mr{nd}}$ equals to the work of force acting on the effective quark

1364:  from the external string and is therefore related to the interference

1365:  of the meson fields  $\vecE^M$ in the vicinity

1366:  of valence gluons  of the order of $\lambda$.

1367: 

1368: \section{Conclusions}

1369: 

1370: In this paper we have systematically treated: the vacuum fields in QCD,

1371: the confinement mechanism, the QCD string formation and finally, the

1372: field distribution inside hadrons. Everywhere we have used the field

1373: correlators as a universal gauge-invariant formalism, which allows to 

1374: describe all phenomena appearing in QCD. In description of vacuum fields

1375: the most important property is the Gaussian dominance: the lowest 

1376: (Gaussian) correlator is dominating on the minimal area surface of the

1377: W-loop, and there are sufficient grounds for the statement that the

1378: total distribution of higher correlators does not exceeed few percent.

1379: This phenomenon, found on the lattice \cite{bali21}, is not yet fully

1380: understood, see \cite{i9,i13}, although it gives an explicit 

1381: dynamical picture, which possibly is incompatible with the old physics

1382: of the instanton gas, of $Z_2$-fluxes $etc.$. Therefore, one can assert

1383: that the picture of the maximally stochastic QCD vacuum is a very good

1384: approximation to the reality. One can remember that the measure of 

1385: coherence is associated with the weight of the contribution of higher

1386: correlators, e.g. for the instanton gas the total contribution of higher 

1387: (non-Gaussian) correlators is dominating. Moreover, the vacuum

1388: correlation length $\lambda$ (i.e. the factor in the exponent for the

1389: asymptotics of the Gaussian correlator) is relatively small, 

1390: $\lambda\sim 0.2$  fm for the quenched vacuum. This value is much

1391: smaller than the typical hadron radius, $\sim 1$ fm. Theoretically, the

1392: smallness of $\lambda$ is connected to a large mass gap for glueballs

1393: and gluelumps, since  $\lambda=1/M$, where $M$ is the lowest gluelump

1394: mass, $M\sim 1.4$ GeV, which is calculated both analytically and on the 

1395: lattice \cite{i111,i112,i113}.

1396: 

1397:  Let us turn now to the confinement

1398: mechanism. From the point of view of field correlators, confinement

1399: occurs due to the appearence of a specific term in the Gaussian 

1400: correlator, denoted $D(x^2)$, which violates Bianchi identities in the

1401: abelian case and therefore is absent in case of QED. If, however, one

1402: considers the $U(1)$ theory with magnetic monopoles present in the 

1403: vacuum, then the function $D(x^2)$ is nonzero and is proportional to the

1404: monopole current correlator. The next step is to find the source of

1405: $D(x^2)$ (i.e. the source of confinement) in the nonabelian theory. It

1406: was done in \cite{uy1,uy2}, where the derivatives of $D(x^2)$ were

1407: connected to the triple correlator $\lan EEB\rrr$. Thus the problem of 

1408: establishing of the confinement mechanism in the formalism of field

1409: correlators reduces to the problem of calculating   $D(x^2)$ and the 

1410: triple correlator and to the finding the conditions of 

1411: its appearence/disappearence (e.g. in QCD -- as functions of temperature 

1412: or baryon density). The lattice calculations confirm the disappearence

1413: of $D(x^2)$ at the deconfinement temperature $T_c$, and with it have

1414: confirmed all cofinement picture in the framework of the present method.

1415: One expects that at the next step-- by computing correlators (including  

1416: $D(x^2)$) with the help of the gluelump Green's functions in the whole

1417: $x$ region -- one will make the field correlator method selfconsistent,

1418: and the problem of confinement will be solved quantitatively and in 

1419: principle. 

1420: 

1421: At the same time, this universal formalism of field 

1422: correlators can be used to study the distribution of effective fields

1423: and currents, defined with the help of the W-loop. This representation,

1424: see chapter 3, enables one to describe, on one hand, the dual Meissner

1425: effect \cite{i151,i152}, and on the other hand, it relates to the

1426: effective Lagrangian approach of Adler and Piran \cite{ap} and

1427: dielectric vacuum models, \cite{lee51,lee52} and subsequent papers.

1428: Indeed, the field correlator method not only admits this approximate 

1429: qualitative interpretation, but also yields explicit expressions for the

1430: density of effective electric charges and effective magnetic currents.

1431: Being the gradient of the color-Coulomb potential at small distances,

1432: the effective field condenses into a tube on the characteristic hadron

1433: scale and ensures confinement. In the process the strong coupling

1434: constant is screened due to the vacuum polarization by nonabelian 

1435: gluonic interactions.

1436: 

1437: Finally, let us summarize the contents of the last

1438: chapter devoted to field distributions inside hadrons with three 

1439: constituents (sources). Here the field correlator method is the only

1440: quantitative analytic method, and its comparison with numerical

1441: (lattice) results is very interesting. One can note that in the method 

1442: one has only two parameters -- the string tension $\sigma$ and the 

1443: correlation length $\lambda$, $\lambda$ being expressed through

1444: $\sigma$, and   $\sigma$ is playing the role of the scale parameter

1445: related to $\Lambda_{\mr{QCD}}$.  The baryon potential computed in this

1446: way \cite{Vpot} is in good agreement with lattice calculations and gives

1447: an independent confirmation that baryon strings have the structure of

1448: the $Y$-type with the string junction. Moreover, the field correlator 

1449: method explains the smaller slope of the baryon potential at the typical

1450: hadron distances, known from the baryon phenomenology -- the decrease of 

1451: the slope is caused by the string interference effects connected to

1452: nonzero correlation length  $\lambda$. The three-gluon glueballs, in

1453: contrast to baryons, can have the structure of both $Y$-type and

1454: $\Delta$-type \cite{hadrons}. However, the latter is preferred

1455: energetically. In the concluding part of the last chapter the field

1456: distributions in baryons and in the  $\Delta$-type glueballs are given,

1457: where one can visualize the shape of the string in these hadrons. 

1458: 

1459: Summarizing, one can say that the universal language of the field

1460: correlator method turns out to be extremely convenient in all cases

1461: considered. In particular, it enables one to formulate the

1462: gauge-invariant description of the QCD vacuum as some medium with

1463: properties ensuring confinement. 

1464: 

1465: The authors are grateful to L.B.Okun 

1466: for his support, to N.O.Agasian, M.I.Polikarpov for

1467: discussions and to A. Di Giacomo, V.G.Bornyakov and D.V.Antonov for

1468: useful remarks. This work was supported by the grant INTAS 00-110. D.K.

1469: and Yu.S.  are also supported by the grant  INTAS 00-00366. V.Sh. is

1470: grateful to FOM and Dutch National Scientific Fund (NOW) for a financial

1471: support.    

1472: 

1473: 

1474: \begin{thebibliography}{100}

1475: \bibitem{i1}

1476: Slavnov A A, Faddeev L D, {\it Gauge fields: an introduction to

1477: quantum theory}, Addison-Wesley PC, Redwood, CA, 1991

1478: \bibitem{i2} Yndurain F J

1479: {\it The Theory of

1480: Quark and Gluon Interactions}, (3rd revised and 

1481: enlarged edition, Springer, NY, 1999) 

1482: \bibitem{i3}

1483: Shifman M A, Vainshtein A I, Zakharov V I {\it Nucl.  Phys.B} {\bf

1484: 147} 385, 448 (1979) 

1485: \bibitem{i4} Simonov Yu A {\it Phys.Uspekhi}, {\bf 39}

1486: 313 (1996) 

1487: \bibitem{i51} Dosch H G {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 190} 177 

1488: (1987)

1489: \bibitem{i52}   Dosch H G, Simonov Yu A {\it Phys.Lett.B}

1490: {\bf 205} 339 (1988) 

1491: \bibitem{i53}    Simonov Yu A {\it 

1492: Nucl.Phys.B}  {\bf 307} 512 (1988) 

1493: \bibitem{i6} Di Giacomo A,

1494: Dosch H G, Shevchenko V I, Simonov Yu A {\it Phys.Rep.} {\bf 372} 

1495: 319 (2002) 

1496: \bibitem{i71} Simonov Yu A, Tjon J {\it Ann. Phys. } 

1497: {\bf 228} 1 (1993)

1498: \bibitem{i72} Simonov Yu A, Tjon J {\it Ann.

1499: Phys. } {\bf 300} 54 (2002)

1500: \bibitem{i9}

1501: Shevchenko V I, Simonov Yu A {\it Int.J.Mod.Phys.A} {\bf 18} 127 (2003)

1502: \bibitem{i111}

1503: UKQCD Collaboration, Foster M, Michael C {\it Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl.} 

1504: {\bf 63} 724 (1998)\bibitem{i112}

1505:  UKQCD Collaboration, Foster M, Michael C {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 59}

1506: 094509 (1999)

1507: \bibitem{i113}

1508:  Simonov Yu A {\it Nucl.Phys.B} {\bf 592} 350 (2001)

1509: \bibitem{i12}

1510: Simonov Yu A {\it Phys.Atom.Nucl.} {\bf 61} 855 (1998)

1511: \bibitem{i13}

1512: Shevchenko V I {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 550} 85 (2002)

1513: \bibitem{i14}

1514: Simonov Yu A, ITEP-PH-13/97, {\it hep-ph/0211330}

1515: \bibitem{i151}

1516: 't Hooft G, × {\it High Energy Physics} (ed. A.Zicici) (Bologna,

1517: Editrici Compositori, 1976)

1518: \bibitem{i152}

1519:  Mandelstam S {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 53} 476 (1975)

1520: \bibitem{i16}

1521: Di Giacomo A, IFUP-TH/2002-15,

1522:   {\it hep-lat/0204032}

1523: \bibitem{i17}

1524: Di Giacomo A {\it Nucl.Phys.A} {\bf 702} 73 (2002)

1525: \bibitem{i181}

1526: Suzuki T, Koma Y, Ito S, Ilgenfritz E-M, Park T W, Polikarpov M I 

1527: Yazawa T {\it Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl.} {\bf  106} 631 (2002)

1528: \bibitem{i182}

1529: Chernodub M N, Gubarev F V, Polikarpov M I, Zakharov V I,

1530: MPI-PhT/2001-02,  {\it hep-lat/0103033}

1531: \bibitem{i19}

1532: Bornyakov V G, Komarov D A, Polikarpov M I, Veselov A I,

1533: ITEP-LAT/2002-18,  {\it hep-lat/0210047}

1534: \bibitem{ap}

1535: Adler S, Piran T {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 113} 405 (1982)

1536: \bibitem{ap1}

1537: Adler S, Piran T {\it Rev.Mod.Phys.} {\bf 56} 1 (1984)

1538: \bibitem{lee51}

1539: Friedberg R, Lee T D {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 15} 1694 (1977)

1540: \bibitem{lee52}

1541: Friedberg R, Lee T D {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 16} 1096 (1977)

1542: \bibitem{Agas1}

1543: Agasian N O, Voskresensky D N {\it Phys.Lett.B}

1544: {\bf 127} 448 (1983)

1545: \bibitem{Agas2} 

1546: Migdal A B, Agasian N O, Khokhlachev S B {\it JETP Lettrs.}

1547: {\bf 41} 497 (1985)

1548: \bibitem{diel3}

1549: Pirner H J, Schuh A, Wilets L {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 174} 10 (1986)

1550: \bibitem{diel4}

1551: Pirner H J, {\it Prog.Part.Nucl.Phys.} {\bf 29} 33 (1992)

1552: \bibitem{chrom1}

1553: Traxler C T, Mosel U, Biro T S,

1554: {\it Phys.Rev.C}  {\bf 59} 1620 (1999)

1555: \bibitem{chrom2}

1556:   Martens G, Greiner C, Leupold S, Mosel U, contributions to QNP 2002,  

1557: {\it hep-ph/0303017}

1558: \bibitem{polyakov}

1559: Polyakov A M {\it Gauge fields and strings}, Harwood Academic

1560: Publishers, Chur, 1987.

1561: \bibitem{i20}

1562: Del Debbio L, Di Giacomo A, Simonov Yu A {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 332} 111 

1563: (1994)

1564: \bibitem{dig5}

1565: Di Giacomo A, Maggiore M, Olejnik S {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 236} 199

1566: (1990)

1567: \bibitem{field}

1568: Kuzmenko D S and Simonov Yu A {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 494}, 81

1569: (2000).

1570: \bibitem{string}

1571: Kuzmenko D S, Simonov Yu A {\it Yad.Fiz.} {\bf 64} 110 (2001)

1572: \bibitem{rep3}

1573: Kuzmenko D S, Simonov Yu A,  {\it hep-ph/0302071},

1574: Yad.Fiz.  {\bf 67}, No.3 (2004) (in press)

1575: \bibitem{Born1}

1576:  H. Ichie, V. Bornyakov, T. Streuer, G. Schierholz,

1577: ITEP-LAT-2002-24, KANAZAWA-02-33, {\it  hep-lat/0212024}.

1578: \bibitem{Born2}

1579: V.Bornyakov et al.  {\it Usp.Fiz.Nauk}, in press.

1580: \bibitem{bali1}

1581: Bali G {\it Phys.Rept.} {\bf 343} 1 (2001)

1582: \bibitem{gth1}

1583: 't Hooft G {\it Nucl.Phys.B} {\bf 72} 461 (1974)

1584: \bibitem{w1}

1585: Wegner F {\it J.Math.Phys.} {\bf 12} 2259 (1971)

1586: \bibitem{w2}

1587: Wilson K {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 10} 2445 (1974)

1588: \bibitem{nast1}

1589: Volterra V, Hostinsky B,  {\it Op\`erations infinit\`esimale

1590: lin\`eaires}, (Gauthiers Villars, Paris, 1939)

1591: \bibitem{nast2}

1592:  Halpern M B {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 19} 517 (1979)

1593: \bibitem{nast3}

1594:  Bralic N {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 22} 3090 (1980)

1595: \bibitem{nast4}

1596:  Aref'eva Y {\it Theor.Math.Phys.} {\bf 43}

1597: 353 (1980)

1598: \bibitem{nast5}

1599:  Simonov Yu A {\it Phys.Atom.Nucl.} {\bf 50} 213

1600: (1989)

1601: \bibitem{nast6}

1602:  Hirayama M, Ueno M {\it Prog.Theor.Phys.} {\bf 103}

1603: 151 (2000)

1604: \bibitem{vk1}

1605: van Kampen N G {\it Phys.Rep.} {\bf 24C} 171 (1976)

1606: \bibitem{vk2}

1607: van Kampen N G {\it Physika}  {\bf 74} 239 (1974)

1608: \bibitem{simlq}

1609: Simonov Yu A, lectures at XVII international school of physics

1610:  {\it "QCD: Perturbative or Nonperturbative?"}, Lisbon, 1999,

1611: {\it hep-ph/9911237}

1612: \bibitem{ej1}

1613: Eidemueller M, Jamin M {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 416} 415 (1998)

1614: \bibitem{ej2}

1615: Shevchenko V I, ITEP-PH-01-98, {\it hep-ph/9802274}

1616: \bibitem{ShS}

1617: Shevchenko V I, Simonov Yu A,  {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 437} 131

1618: (1998)

1619: \bibitem{mand}

1620: Mandelstam S, {\it Phys.Rev.} {\bf 175} 1580 (1968)

1621: \bibitem{yu8}

1622: Simonov Yu A {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 464} 265 (1999)

1623: \bibitem{as}

1624: Antonov D V, Simonov Yu A {it Yad.Fiz.} {\bf 60} 553 (1997)

1625: \bibitem{i101}

1626: Campostrini M, Di Giacomo A, Mussardo G {\it Z.Phys.C} {\bf 25}

1627: 173 (1984)

1628: \bibitem{i102}

1629: Campostrini M, Di Giacomo A, Olejnik S {\it Z.Phys.C} {\bf 34}

1630: 577 (1986)

1631: \bibitem{i103}

1632: Campostrini M, Di Giacomo A, Maggiore M, Panagopoulos H,

1633: Vicari E {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 225} 403 (1989)

1634: \bibitem{i104}

1635:  Di Giacomo A, Panagopoulos H  {\it Phys.Lett.B}   {\bf 285} 133 (1992)

1636: \bibitem{i105}

1637:  Di Giacomo A, Meggiolaro E,

1638: Panagopoulos H {\it Nucl.Phys.B} {\bf 483} 371 (1997)

1639: \bibitem{bcor}

1640: Bali G S, Brambilla N, Vairo A {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 421} 265 (1998) 

1641: \bibitem{we5}

1642: Simonov Yu A, Shevchenko V I {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 65} 074029 (2002)

1643: \bibitem{bali21}

1644: Bali G {\it

1645: Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl.} {\bf 83} 422 (2000)

1646: \bibitem{bali22}

1647:  Bali G {\it

1648: Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 62} 114503 (2000)

1649: \bibitem{deldar1}

1650: Deldar S {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 62} 034509 (2000)

1651: \bibitem{deldar2}

1652:  Deldar S {\it

1653: Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl.} {\bf 73} 587 (1999)

1654: \bibitem{lucini1}

1655: Del Debbio L, Panagopoulos H, Rossi P, Vicari E {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf

1656: 65} 021501 (2002)

1657: \bibitem{lucini2}

1658:  Del Debbio L, Panagopoulos H, Rossi P, Vicari E {\it JHEP} {\bf 0201}

1659:  009 (2002)

1660: \bibitem{lucini3}

1661:  Lucini B, Teper M {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 501} 128 (2001)

1662: \bibitem{lucini4}

1663:  Lucini B, Teper M {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 64} 105019 (2001) 

1664: \bibitem{faber3}

1665:  L. Del Debbio, M. Faber, J. Greensite, S. Olejnik,

1666:   {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 53} 5891 (1996)

1667: \bibitem{aop}

1668: Ambj\o{}rn J, Olesen P, Peterson C {\it Nucl.Phys.B} {\bf 240}

1669: 189, 533 (1984)

1670: \bibitem{simcas11}

1671: Simonov Yu A {\it JETP Lett.} {\bf 71} 127 (2000)

1672: \bibitem{simcas12}

1673: Shevchenko V I, Simonov Yu A {\it Phys.Rev.Lett.} {\bf 85} 1811 (2000)

1674: \bibitem{trot}

1675: Trottier H D {\it Phys.Lett.B} {\bf 357} 193 (1995)

1676: \bibitem{lee}

1677: Lee K-M {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 48} 2493 (1993)

1678: \bibitem{ant2}

1679: Antonov D V {\it Surveys High Energ.Phys.} {\bf 14} 265 (2000)

1680: \bibitem{ant3}

1681: Antonov D V {\it JHEP} {\bf 0007} (2000) 055

1682: \bibitem{nacht}

1683: Nachtmann O, in the proc. {\it St.Barbara Nucl.Chrom.} {\bf 183} (1985)

1684: \bibitem{D1}

1685: Kuzmenko D S {\it hep-ph/0310017}

1686: \bibitem{D2}

1687: Kuzmenko D S {\it hep-ph/0310035}, {\it

1688: talk at Hadron'03, Aschaffenburg, Germany }

1689:  \bibitem{hyb1}

1690:  Yu.A.Simonov, Lectures at the XVII International

1691: School of Physics, Lisbon, 1999, hep-ph/9911237

1692: \bibitem{ano2}

1693: Nielsen H B, Olesen P {\it Nucl.Phys.B} {\bf 61} 45 (1973)

1694: \bibitem{Shevchenko}

1695: Shevchenko V I, Preprint ITEP-PH-1-98, {\it hep-ph/9802274}

1696: \bibitem{ano1}

1697: Abrikosov A A {\it JETP} {\bf 5} 1174 (1957)

1698: \bibitem{B}

1699: Bornyakov V G {\it et al.}, {\it hep-lat/0310011}

1700: \bibitem{alpha1}

1701: Badalian A M,  Kuzmenko D S {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 65} 016004

1702: (2002)

1703: \bibitem{alpha2}

1704:  Badalian A M, Kuzmenko D S,

1705: {\it hep-ph/0302072}, Yad.Fiz.  {\bf 67}, No.3 (2004) (in press)

1706: \bibitem{Capitan}

1707: S. Capitani {\it et al.}, Nucl.Phys. {\bf B} 544 (1999)

1708: \bibitem{talk}

1709: Kuzmenko D S, Simonov Yu A {\it hep-ph/0310034}, {\it

1710: talk at Hadron'03, Aschaffenburg, Germany }

1711: \bibitem{hadrons}

1712: Kuzmenko D S, Simonov Yu A  {\it Yad.Fiz.} {\bf 66} 5 (2003),

1713: {\it hep-ph/0202277}

1714: \bibitem{BPT5}

1715: Simonov Yu A, in {\it Lecture Notes in Physics} {\bf 479} 139,

1716: (Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, 1996)

1717: \bibitem{BPT6}

1718:  Simonov Yu A {\it Phys.At.Nucl.} {\bf 58} 107 (1995)

1719: \bibitem{FFSR1}

1720: Feynman R P, {\it Phys.Rev.} {\bf 80} 440 (1950); ibid.

1721:  {\bf 84} 108 (1951)

1722: \bibitem{FFSR2}

1723: Fock V A, {\it Izv. AN SSSR}, OMEN 557 (1937)

1724: \bibitem{FFSR3}

1725: Schwinger J, {\it Phys.Rev.} {\bf 82} 664 (1951)

1726: \bibitem{Vpot}

1727: Kuzmenko D S, {\it hep-ph/0204250},

1728:  Yad.Fiz.  {\bf 66}, No.12 (2003) (in press)

1729: \bibitem{Tak}

1730: Takahashi T T {\it et al.}, {\it Phys.Rev.D} {\bf 65}

1731: 114509 (2002)

1732: \bibitem{deF}

1733: Alexandrou C, de Forcrand Ph, Jahn O,

1734:  {\it hep-lat/0209062}

1735: \bibitem{uy1}

1736: Simonov Yu A {\it Yad.Fiz.} {\bf 50} 213 (1989)

1737: \bibitem{uy2}

1738: Shevchenko V I, Simonov Yu A  {\it Phys. Atom. Nucl.} {\bf 60} 1201 

1739: (1997)\end{thebibliography}

1740: 

1741: \newpage

1742: 

1743: \begin{figure}[!t]

1744: \hspace*{1.5cm}

1745: \epsfxsize=10cm

1746: \epsfbox{probe_mes.eps}

1747: \caption{ A connected probe \rf{F2} for static quark and antiquark}

1748: \end{figure}

1749: 

1750: 

1751: \begin{figure}[!b]

1752: \hspace*{-1cm}

1753: \epsfxsize=16cm

1754: \epsfbox{field3D.eps}

1755: \caption{ A distribution of the field  

1756:  $|\vecE(x_1,0,x_3)|$ \rf{Edist} at quark-antiquark separation 2 fm.

1757: Cutted peaks of color-Coulomb field and string between 

1758: quark and antiquark are clearly distinguished. The standard 

1759: values of parameters $\sigma=0.18$ GeV$^2$,

1760: $\lambda=0.2$ fm are used.}

1761: \end{figure}

1762: 

1763: \clearpage

1764: 

1765: \begin{figure}[!t]

1766: \hspace*{3cm}

1767: \epsfxsize=7cm

1768: \epsfbox{current3D.eps}

1769: \caption{ A vector distribution of magnetic currents \rf{3.13}, 

1770: \rf{k} at quark-antiquark separation 2 fm.

1771: Positions of quark and antiquark are shown by points. }

1772: \end{figure}

1773: 

1774: \clearpage

1775: 

1776: \begin{figure}[!t]

1777: \epsfxsize=10cm

1778: \epsfbox{Charge.eps}

1779: \caption{ An effective charge $Q(r)$ \rf{3.26} in dependence of

1780: the distance from the quark for $\sigma=0.18$ GeV$^2$,

1781: $\lambda=0.2$ fm  and constant value $\alpha_s=0.42$. }

1782: \end{figure}

1783: 

1784: 

1785: 

1786: \begin{figure}[!t]

1787: \epsfxsize=10cm

1788: \epsfbox{Qrun.eps}

1789: \caption{ A running background coupling $C_F \alpha_B(r)$

1790: \cite{alpha1} (dotted curve) and running effective charge

1791: $Q^{\mr{run}}=C_F \alpha_B(r)-\tilde Q(r)$ (solid curve) vs. the 

1792: distancefrom the quark.}

1793: \end{figure}

1794: \clearpage

1795: 

1796: \begin{figure}[!t]

1797: \hspace*{0.5cm}

1798: \epsfxsize=12cm

1799: \epsfbox{profile1.eps}

1800: \caption{ Distributions of the projections of the fields 

1801:  $\vecE^D(0,0,x_3)$  (solid curve),  $\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}(0,0,x_3)$ 

1802: (dashed curve) and  $\vecE^{D_1,\mr{oge}}(0,0,x_3)$ (dotted curve) onto 

1803: the quark-antiquark axis at $Q\bar Q$-separation 3 fm.}

1804: \end{figure}

1805: 

1806: 

1807: \begin{figure}[!t]

1808: \hspace*{0.5cm}

1809: \epsfxsize=12cm

1810: \epsfbox{profile2.eps}

1811: \caption{ Distributions of the projections of the fields  

1812: $\vecE^D(0,0,x_3)$ (solid curve), $\vecE^D(0,0,x_3) 

1813: +\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}(0,0,x_3)$ (dashed curve)  and  $\vecE(0,0,x_3)$ 

1814: (dotted curve)  into the quark-antiquark axis at $Q\bar Q$-separation 3 

1815: fm.}\end{figure}

1816: 

1817: 

1818: 

1819: \clearpage

1820: 

1821: 

1822: \begin{figure}[!t]

1823: \hspace*{-2cm}

1824: \epsfxsize=16cm

1825: \epsfbox{fullfield.eps}

1826: \caption{ Vector distribution of the field

1827: $\vecE(x_1,0,x_3)$. Positions of quark and antiquark are marked by 

1828: points. }\end{figure}

1829: 

1830: 

1831: 

1832: \begin{figure}[!t]

1833: %\hspace*{0.5cm}

1834: \epsfxsize=12cm

1835: \epsfbox{solenoidfield.eps}

1836: \caption{Vector distribution of the solenoid field   $\vecE^D(x_1,0,x_3) 

1837: +\vecE^{D_1,\mr{np}}(x_1,0,x_3)$. Positions of quark and antiquark are 

1838: marked by points.}\end{figure}

1839: 

1840: 

1841: 

1842: \clearpage

1843: 

1844: \begin{figure}[!t]

1845: \hspace*{1.5cm}

1846: \epsfxsize=10cm

1847: \epsfbox{BWL.eps}

1848: \caption{ A W-loop of $Y$-type.}

1849: \end{figure}

1850: 

1851: 

1852: \begin{figure}[!t]

1853: \hspace*{1.5cm}

1854: \epsfxsize=10cm

1855: \epsfbox{DeltaWL.eps}

1856: \caption{ A W-loop of $\Delta$-type.}

1857: \end{figure}

1858: 

1859: \clearpage

1860: 

1861: \begin{figure}[!t]

1862: %\hspace*{1cm}

1863: \epsfxsize=12cm

1864: \epsfbox{VTak.eps}

1865: \caption{A potential in baryon \rf{4.13} with the color-Coulomb part

1866: contracted (solid curve) in comparison with the lattice data

1867:   \cite{Tak} points in dependence on the total length of the baryon string

1868:  $L$. A value of the string tension is $\sigma=0.22$ GeV$^2$. According to

1869: \rf{3.27}, the corresponding value of correlation length is $\lambda=0.18$ fm.}

1870: \end{figure}

1871: 

1872: \begin{figure}[!t]

1873: \epsfxsize=12cm

1874: \epsfbox{VdeF.eps}

1875: \caption{ A dependence of the baryon potential in equilateral triangle

1876: on quark separation $r$ (solid curve) in comparison with  the lattice data

1877:  \cite{deF} (points).  A value of the string tension is

1878: $\sigma=0.17$ GeV$^2$ ($\lambda=0.21$ fm).}

1879: \end{figure}

1880: 

1881: 

1882: 

1883: \clearpage

1884: 

1885: \begin{figure}[!t]

1886: \epsfxsize=12cm

1887: \epsfbox{Vgball.eps}

1888: \caption{ Potentials of three-gluon-glueballs

1889:  $V_G^Y$ (solid curve) and $V_G^\Delta$ (dotte curve)

1890:  in equilateral triangle vs. the sources separation $r$.}

1891: \end{figure}

1892: 

1893: 

1894: \clearpage

1895: 

1896: \begin{figure}[!t]

1897: \hspace*{-0.5cm}

1898: \epsfxsize=14cm

1899: \epsfbox{planeY1.eps}

1900: \caption{A distribution of the field $\vecE^{(B)}$ \rf{4.16}, \rf{4.17} 

1901: in GeV/fm with the only correlator  $D$ contribution considered in the

1902: quark plane for equilateral triangle with the side 1 fm. 

1903: Coordinates are given in fm, positions of quarks are marked

1904: by points. }

1905: \end{figure}

1906: 

1907: 

1908: \begin{figure}[!t]

1909: \hspace*{-0.5cm}

1910: \epsfxsize=14cm

1911: \epsfbox{planeY2.eps}

1912: \caption{ The same as in Fig. 15 but with the side of the

1913: equilateral triangle equal to 3.5 fm. }

1914: \end{figure}

1915: 

1916: 

1917: \clearpage

1918: 

1919: \begin{figure}[!t]

1920: \hspace*{-1cm}

1921: \epsfxsize=15cm

1922: \epsfbox{contour.eps}

1923: \caption{ A surface $|\vecE^{(B)}(\vex)|=\sigma$ at quark separations

1924: 1 fm. Coordinates are given in fm, positions of quarks are marked

1925: by points. }

1926: \end{figure}

1927: 

1928: 

1929: 

1930: \clearpage

1931: 

1932: \begin{figure}[!t]

1933: \hspace*{-0.5cm}

1934: \epsfxsize=14cm

1935: \epsfbox{planeDelta.eps}

1936: \caption{ A distribution of the field   $|\vecE_\Delta^{(G)}(\vex)|$ 

1937: \rf{4.18} in GeV/fm of the triangular glueball in the plane of valence gluons

1938: with separations 1 fm. Coordinates are given in fm, positions of valence gluons are marked

1939: by points. }

1940: \end{figure}

1941: 

1942: 

1943: 

1944: \begin{figure}[!t]

1945: \hspace*{-1cm}

1946: \epsfxsize=15cm

1947: \epsfbox{contourD.eps}

1948: \caption{ A surface $|\vecE_\Delta^{(G)}(\vex)|=\sigma$

1949:  at valence gluons separations 1 fm. Coordinates are given in fm,

1950:  positions of valence gluons are marked by points.}

1951: \end{figure}

1952: 

1953: 

1954: \end{document}

1955: 

1956: 

1957: