1: \documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
2:
3: \usepackage{graphicx}
4: \usepackage{dcolumn}
5: \usepackage{bm}
6:
7:
8: \begin{document}
9: \newcommand{\gdhi}{\ooalign{\hfil/\hfil\crcr$\partial$}}
10:
11: \def\Sp{\mathop{\mathrm{Sp}}\nolimits}
12: \def\sgn{\mathop{\mathrm{sgn}}\nolimits}
13: \def\erfc{\mathop{\mathrm{erfc}}\nolimits}
14: \def\tr{\mathop{\mathrm{tr}}\nolimits}
15: \def\as{\mathop{\mathrm{as}}\nolimits}
16: \def\val{\mathop{\mathrm{val}}\nolimits}
17:
18: \title{Quantization of the chiral soliton in medium}
19: % Force line breaks with \\
20:
21: \author{S.Nagai}
22: \author{N.Sawado}
23: \email{sawado@ph.noda.tus.ac.jp}
24: \author{N.Shiiki}
25: \email{norikoshiiki@mail.goo.ne.jp}
26: \affiliation{
27: Department of Physics, Faculty of Science and Technology,
28: Tokyo University of Science, Noda, Chiba 278-8510, Japan
29: }
30: \date{\today}
31:
32: \begin{abstract}
33: Chiral solitons coupled with quarks in medium are studied
34: based on the Wigner-Seitz approximation.
35: The chiral quark soliton model is used to obtain the classical
36: soliton solutions. To investigate nucleon and $\Delta$ in matter,
37: the semi-classical quantization is performed by the cranking method.
38: The saturation for nucleon matter and $\Delta$ matter are observed.
39: \end{abstract}
40:
41: \pacs{12.39.Fe, 12.39.Ki, 21.65.+f, 24.85.+p}
42:
43: \maketitle
44:
45: \section{\label{sec:level1}Introduction\protect\\ }
46: The study of dense nuclear matter with the internal nucleon structure
47: is old but still a challenging subject.
48: Especially, the approach of the topological soliton
49: model seems interesting, because it is believed as a
50: low energy effective model in the large $N_c$-limit of QCD.
51: It was first applied for nuclear matter system in 80's by using
52: the skyrmion centered cubic (CC) crystal by Klebanov~\cite{klebanov85}.
53: This configuration was studied further by W\"ust, Brown and Jackson
54: to estimate the baryon density and discuss the phase transition
55: between nuclear matter and quark matter~\cite{wust87}.
56: Goldhabor and Manton found a new configuration, body centered cubic (BCC)
57: of half-skyrmions in a higher density regime~\cite{manton87}.
58: The face centered cubic (FCC) and BCC lattice were also
59: studied by Castillejo {\it et al.}~\cite{castillejo89}
60: and the phase transitions between those configurations were
61: investigated by Kugler and Shtrikman~\cite{kugler89}.
62: Recently, the idea of using crystallized skyrmions to study
63: nuclear matter was revived by Park, Min, Rho and Vento
64: with the introduction of the Atiyah-Manton multi-soliton ansatz
65: in a unit cell~\cite{park02}.
66:
67: Incorporating quark degrees of freedom into each soliton
68: makes the prediction more realistic.
69: Achtzehnter, Scheid and Wilets investigated the Friedberg-Lee
70: soliton bag model with a simple cubic lattice~\cite{achtzehnter85}.
71: Due to the periodicity of the background potential, the solution of
72: the Dirac equation has the form of the Bloch waves,
73: $\psi_{\bm k}({\bm r})=e^{i\bm{k}\cdot\bm{r}}\phi_{\bm k}({\bm r})$
74: where $\phi_{\bm k}$ satisfies the same periodic boundary condition
75: as the background potential. They performed the calculation for
76: only one direction of the crystal momenta ${\bm k}=k{\bm e_z}$ and
77: assumed the spherically symmetric energy surface.
78: The Bloch condition is, however, anisotropic for the nonzero ${\bm k}$
79: and the results should be highly dependent on the approximation.
80: The analysis of the crystal soliton
81: model with quarks based on the Wigner-Seitz approximation
82: has been already done. In this ansatz, a single soliton
83: is placed on the center of a spherical unit cell.
84: Then the lowest energy level (``bottom'' of the band) for the valence quarks becomes
85: s-state. The appropriate boundary conditions at the cell
86: boundary should be imposed on the quark wave functions
87: as well as the chiral fields. This simple treatment sheds
88: light on the nucleon structure in nuclear medium. Soliton
89: matter within this approximation have been extensively
90: studied by using various nucleon models such as the
91: the chiral quark-meson type model
92: ~\cite{banerjee85,glendenning86,hahn87,weber98},
93: Friedberg-Lee soliton bag model~\cite{reinhardt85,weber98,birse88,barnea00},
94: the Skyrme model~\cite{Kutschera84}.
95: The non-zero dispersion of the lowest band \cite{weber98}
96: and the quark-meson coupling \cite{barnea00} were also examined within this approximation.
97:
98: The chiral quark soliton model (CQSM) can be interpreted as the soliton bag model
99: including not only valence quarks but also the vacuum sea quark polarization
100: effects explicitly~\cite{diakonov88,reinhardt88,meissner89}. The model provides
101: correct observables of a nucleon such as mass, electromagnetic
102: value, spin carried by quarks, parton distributions
103: and octet, decuplet $SU(3)$ baryon spectra~\cite{report}. Remarkably
104: this model predicted the exotic quark bound state, pentaquark
105: $\Theta^+$~\cite{diakonov97} which was successfully observed
106: in experiments~\cite{nakano03}.
107:
108: Amore and De Pace studied soliton matter in the CQSM using the Wigner-Seitz
109: approximation and observed the nuclear saturation~\cite{amore00}.
110: They examined the soliton solutions with three different boundary
111: conditions imposed on the quark wave function. However the obtained
112: saturation density was higher than the experimental value and they
113: concluded that such discrepancy is originated in the approximate
114: treatment of the sea quark contribution~\cite{adjali92}.
115: Thus we treat the vacuum polarization exactly in the manner
116: originally proposed by Kahana and Ripka~\cite{kahana84} and semi-classically
117: quantize the chiral soliton by the cranking method to see those effects
118: on the matter solution.
119: At present, soliton matter has been studied only at the classical energy level.
120: In order to study the property of nucleon or $\Delta$ in medium,
121: the spin and isospin of each of the soliton must be quantized.
122: We hence perform the rotational collective quantization by the cranking
123: formula and observe the saturation of nuclear and $\Delta$ matter.
124: As shown in Sec. V, we obtained very shallow saturation.
125:
126: Unfortunately, the study of the nuclear matter within the soliton
127: model often fails to fit the experimental values, even in the saturation energy.
128: This may be caused by the fact that the topological soliton picture is based
129: on the approximation of large $N_c$-limit of QCD and therefore works well
130: only in the very low energy scale.
131: Thus our model improves slightly the situation in the sense that we take
132: into account the quantum correction of $O(1/N_c)$ to the classical soliton
133: mass of $O(N_c)$. However, it should be noted that as our model contains
134: the valence quark explicitly, the physical meaning of such $N_c$ counting
135: is obscure.
136: Of course, the prescription is still insufficient, and the obtained results
137: will still room for improvement.
138:
139: \section{\label{sec:level2}The chiral quark soliton model\protect\\ }
140: The CQSM was originally derived from the instanton
141: liquid model of the QCD vacuum and incorporates the non-perturbative
142: feature of the low-energy QCD, spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking.
143: The vacuum functional is defined by~\cite{diakonov88}
144: \begin{eqnarray}
145: {\cal Z} = \int {\cal D}\pi{\cal D}\psi{\cal D}\psi^{\dagger}\exp \left[
146: i \int d^{4}x \, \bar{\psi} \left(i\!\!\not\!\partial
147: - MU^{\gamma_{5}}\right) \psi \right] \label{vacuum_functional}
148: \end{eqnarray}
149: where the SU(2) matrix
150: \begin{eqnarray}
151: U^{\gamma_{5}}= \frac{1+\gamma_{5}}{2} U + \frac{1-\gamma_{5}}{2} U^{\dagger}
152: \end{eqnarray}
153: with
154: \begin{eqnarray}
155: U=\exp \left( i \bm{\tau} \cdot \bm{\phi}/f_{\pi} \right)
156: =\frac{1}{f_\pi}(\sigma+i\bm{\tau}\cdot\bm{\pi})
157: \end{eqnarray}
158: describes chiral fields, $\psi$ is quark fields and $M$ is the dynamical
159: quark mass. We choose the constituent quark mass $M=420$ MeV which reproduces
160: the experimental observables of the free nucleon correctly~\cite{report}.
161: $f_{\pi} $ is the pion decay constant and experimentally
162: $f_{\pi} \sim 93 {\rm MeV}$.
163: Since our concern is the tree-level pions and one-loop quarks according
164: to the Hartree mean field approach, the kinetic term of the pion fields which
165: gives a contribution to higher loops can be neglected.
166: Due to the interaction between the valence quarks and the Dirac sea,
167: soliton solutions appear as bound states of quarks in the background of self-consistent
168: mean chiral field. $N_{c}$ valence quarks fill the each bound state to form a baryon.
169: The baryon number is thus identified with the number of bound states filled by
170: the valence quarks \cite{kahana84}.
171: The $B=1$ soliton solution has been studied in detail at classical and
172: quantum level in \cite{diakonov88,reinhardt88,meissner89,
173: report,wakamatsu91}.
174:
175: The vacuum functional in Eq.(\ref{vacuum_functional}) can be integrated
176: over the quark fields to obtain the effective action
177: \begin{eqnarray}
178: S_{{\rm eff}}[U]&=&-iN_{c}{\rm lndet}\left(i
179: \!\!\not\!\partial - MU^{\gamma_{5}}\right)\label{effective_action1}\\
180: &=&-\frac{i}{2}N_{c}{\rm Spln}D^{\dagger}D
181: \label{effective_action2}
182: \end{eqnarray}
183: where $i D=i\gdhi - MU^{\gamma_{5}}$~($iD$ is called the Dirac operator).
184: This determinant is ultraviolet divergent and must be
185: regularized. Using the proper-time regularization scheme, we can write
186: \begin{eqnarray}
187: &&S^{{\rm reg}}_{{\rm eff}}[U]
188: =\frac{i}{2}N_{c}
189: \int^{\infty}_{1/\Lambda^2}\frac{d\tau}{\tau}{\rm Sp}\left(
190: {\rm e}^{-D^{\dagger}D\tau}-{\rm e}^{-D_{0}^{\dagger}D_{0}\tau}\right)
191: \nonumber \\
192: &&=\frac{iN_{c}T}{2}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}\frac{d\omega}{2\pi}
193: \int^{\infty}_{1/\Lambda^2}\frac{d\tau}{\tau}{\rm Sp}\left[{\rm e}
194: ^{-\tau (H^2+\omega^2)}-{\rm e}^{-\tau (H_{0}^2+\omega^2)}\right]
195: \label{regularised_action} \nonumber \\
196: \end{eqnarray}
197: where $T$ is the Euclidean time separation, $\Lambda$ is a cut-off
198: parameter evaluated by the condition that the derivative expansion of
199: Eq.(\ref{effective_action1}) reproduces the pion kinetic term with the
200: correct coefficient ${\it i.e.}$
201: \begin{eqnarray}
202: f_{\pi}^2=\frac{N_{c}m^2}{4\pi^2}\int^{\infty}_{1/\Lambda^2}
203: \frac{d\tau}{\tau}{\rm e}^{-\tau M^2}
204: \,\, , \label{cutoff_parameter}
205: \end{eqnarray}
206: and $H$ is the Dirac one-quark Hamiltonian defined by
207: \begin{eqnarray}
208: H=\frac{\bm{\alpha}\!\cdot\!\nabla}{\it{i}}+\beta M
209: U^{\gamma_{5}}\,\,. \label{hamiltonian}
210: \end{eqnarray}
211: $D_{0}\equiv D(U=1)$ and $H_{0}\equiv H(U=1)$ correspond to
212: the vacuum sectors.
213: At $T \rightarrow \infty$, we have ${\rm e}^{iS_{{\rm eff}}}
214: \sim {\rm e}^{-iE_{\rm sea}T}$. Integrating over $\omega$
215: in Eq.(\ref{regularised_action}) and constructing a complete set of
216: eigenstates of $H$ with
217: \begin{eqnarray}
218: H|\nu\rangle = \epsilon_{\nu}|\nu\rangle\,\, ,\,\,\,
219: H_{0}|\nu\rangle^{(0)} = \epsilon^{(0)}_{\nu}|\nu\rangle^{(0)}
220: \,\, , \label{eigen_equation}
221: \end{eqnarray}
222: one obtains the sea quark energy \cite{meissner89}
223: \begin{eqnarray}
224: E_{\rm sea}[U]=\frac{N_{c}}{4\sqrt{\pi}}\int^{\infty}_{1/\Lambda^2}
225: \frac{d\tau}{\tau^{3/2}}\left(\sum_{\nu}{\rm e}^{-\tau\epsilon_{\nu}^2}
226: -\sum_{\nu}{\rm e}^{-\tau\epsilon^{(0)2}_{\nu}}\right).
227: \nonumber \\
228: \label{energy_sea}
229: \end{eqnarray}
230: In the Hartree picture, the baryon states are the quarks occupying all
231: negative Dirac sea and valence levels. Hence, if we define the total soliton energy
232: $E_{\rm static}$, the valence quark energy $E_{\rm val}[U]$ should be added;
233: \begin{eqnarray}
234: E_{\rm static}[U]=N_{c}E_{\rm val}[U]+E_{\rm sea}[U]\,\,.
235: \label{energy_static}
236: \end{eqnarray}
237: To obtain the $B=1$ soliton solution, we impose the hedgehog ansatz on the chiral field
238: \begin{eqnarray}
239: U(\bm{r})=\exp(i F(r) \hat{\bm{r}}\cdot \bm{\tau})=\cos F(r)+i\hat{\bm{r}}\cdot \bm{\tau}\sin F(r)
240: \label{chiral_fields_hedgehog}
241: \end{eqnarray}
242: with the boundary conditions
243: \begin{eqnarray}
244: F(0)=-\pi,~~F(\infty)=0\,.
245: \label{boundary_condition}
246: \end{eqnarray}
247: The one-quark hamiltonian (\ref{hamiltonian}) reads
248: \begin{eqnarray}
249: H(U^{\gamma_5})=-i\alpha\cdot\nabla + \beta M(\cos F(r)+i\gamma_5\hat{\bm{r}}\cdot
250: \bm{\tau}\sin F(r))\,. \nonumber \\
251: \label{hamiltonian_hedgehog}
252: \end{eqnarray}
253: This hamiltonian does not commute with the total angular momentum $\bm{j}$ nor the
254: isospin $\bm{\tau}/2$ but commute with the grand spin operator
255: $\bm{K}=\bm{j}+\bm{\tau}/2$ with $[H,\bm{K}]=0$.
256: $H$ also commutes with the ${\cal P}=\gamma_0$ which turns to be a parity operator.
257: As a result, the one-quark eigenstates are labeled by the $K=0,1,2,\cdots$ and the
258: parity ${\cal P}=\pm$. The three valence quarks occupy the
259: lowest states $K^{\cal P}=0^{+}$ and are responsible for the baryon number $(=1)$
260: (non topological charge).
261:
262: Field equations for the chiral fields can be obtained by demanding
263: that the total energy in Eq.(\ref{energy_static}) be stationary
264: with respect to variation of the profile function $F(r)$,
265: \begin{eqnarray*}
266: \frac{\delta}{\delta F(r)}E_{\rm static}=0 \,\, ,
267: \end{eqnarray*}
268: which produces
269: \begin{eqnarray}
270: S(r)\sin F(r)=P(r)\cos F(r),
271: \label{field_equation}
272: \end{eqnarray}
273: where
274: \begin{eqnarray}
275: S(r)&=&N_{c}\sum_\nu\bigl(n_\nu\theta(\epsilon_\nu)+{\rm sign}(\epsilon_\nu)
276: {\mathcal N}(\epsilon_\nu)\bigr) \nonumber \\
277: &\times&\langle \nu |\gamma^{0}\delta(|x|-r)|\nu\rangle\,,
278: \\
279: P(r)&=&N_{c}\sum_\nu\bigl(n_\nu\theta(\epsilon_\nu)+{\rm sign}(\epsilon_\nu)
280: {\mathcal N}(\epsilon_\nu)\bigr) \nonumber \\
281: &\times&\langle \nu |i \gamma^{0}\gamma^{5}\hat{\bm{r}}
282: \cdot\bm{\tau}\delta(|x|-r)|\nu\rangle \, .
283: \end{eqnarray}
284: with
285: \begin{eqnarray*}
286: {\cal N}(\epsilon_{\nu})=-\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi}}\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2},
287: \left(\frac{\epsilon_\nu}{\Lambda}\right)^2\right)
288: \end{eqnarray*}
289: and $n_\nu$ is the valence quark occupation number.
290:
291:
292: The procedure to obtain the self-consistent solution of Eq.(\ref{field_equation})
293: is that $1)$ solve the eigenequation in (\ref{eigen_equation}) under an assumed
294: initial profile function $F_{0}(r)$, $2)$ use the resultant eigenfunctions and
295: eigenvalues to calculate $S(r)$ and $P(r)$, $3)$ solve
296: Eq.(\ref{field_equation}) to obtain a new profile function, $4)$ repeat $1)-3)$
297: until the self-consistency is attained.
298:
299:
300: \begin{figure}
301: \includegraphics[height=7cm, width=9cm]{Fig1.EPS}
302: \caption{\label{fig:Fig1} Profile functions for $R=0.5,1,2$ fm and the
303: free soliton. }
304: \end{figure}
305:
306: \section{\label{sec:level4}The numerical basis\protect\\ }
307: In this section we present the numerical method of eigen problem of the hamiltonian~(\ref{hamiltonian_hedgehog}).
308: The hamiltonian with hedgehog ansatz commutes with the parity and the grandspin operator
309: given by
310: \begin{eqnarray*}
311: \bm{K}=\bm{j}+\bm{\tau}/2=\bm{l}+\bm{\sigma}/2+\bm{\tau}/2,
312: \end{eqnarray*}
313: where $\bm{j},\bm{l}$ are respectively total angular momentum and orbital angular momentum.
314: Accordingly, the angular basis can be written as
315: \begin{eqnarray}
316: |(lj)KM\rangle= \sum_{j_3\tau_3}C^{KM}_{jj_3\frac{1}{2}\tau_3}
317: \Bigl(\sum_{m\sigma_3}C^{jj_3}_{lm\frac{1}{2}\sigma_3}
318: |lm \rangle |\frac{1}{2}\sigma_3 \rangle \Bigr) |\frac{1}{2} \tau_3 \rangle\,.\nonumber\\
319: \end{eqnarray}
320: For $B=1$ solution, following states are possible
321: \begin{eqnarray}
322: &&|0\rangle =|(K~K+\frac{1}{2})KM \rangle\,, \nonumber \\
323: &&|1\rangle =|(K~K-\frac{1}{2})KM \rangle\,, \nonumber \\
324: &&|2\rangle =|(K+1 K+\frac{1}{2})KM\rangle\,, \nonumber \\
325: &&|3\rangle =|(K-1 K-\frac{1}{2})KM\rangle\,. \nonumber
326: \end{eqnarray}
327: With this angular basis, the normalized eigenstates of the free hamiltonian
328: in a spherical box with radius $R$ can be constructed as follows:
329: \begin{eqnarray}
330: &&u^{(a)}_{KM}=
331: N_k\left(
332: \begin{array}{c}
333: i\omega^{+}_{\epsilon_k}j_{K}(kr)|0\rangle \\
334: \omega^{-}_{\epsilon_k}j_{K+1}(kr)|2\rangle
335: \end{array}
336: \right), \nonumber \\
337: &&u^{(b)}_{KM}=
338: N_k\left(
339: \begin{array}{c}
340: i\omega^{+}_{\epsilon_k}j_{K}(kr)|1\rangle \\
341: -\omega^{-}_{\epsilon_k}j_{K-1}(kr)|3\rangle
342: \end{array}
343: \right), \nonumber \\
344: &&v^{(a)}_{KM}=
345: N_k\left(
346: \begin{array}{c}
347: i\omega^{+}_{\epsilon_k}j_{K+1}(kr)|2\rangle \\
348: -\omega^{-}_{\epsilon_k} j_{K}(kr)|0\rangle
349: \end{array}
350: \right), \nonumber \\
351: &&v^{(b)}_{KM}=
352: N_k\left(
353: \begin{array}{c}
354: i\omega^{+}_{\epsilon_k}j_{K-1}(kr)|3\rangle \\
355: \omega^{-}_{\epsilon_k} j_{K}(kr)|1\rangle
356: \end{array}
357: \right),
358: \label{kahana_ripka}
359: \end{eqnarray}
360: with
361: \begin{eqnarray}
362: N_k=\biggl[\frac{1}{2}R^3
363: \Bigl(j_{K+1}(kR)\Bigr)^2\biggr]^{-1/2}
364: \end{eqnarray}
365: and $\omega^{+}_{\epsilon_k>0},\omega^{-}_{\epsilon_k<0}={\rm sgn}(\epsilon_k),
366: \omega^{-}_{\epsilon_k>0},\omega^{+}_{\epsilon_k<0}=k/(\epsilon_k+M)$.
367: The $u$ and $v$ correspond to the {\it ``natural''}
368: and {\it ``unnatural''} components of the basis
369: which stand for parity $(-1)^{K}$ and $(-1)^{K+1}$ respectively.
370: The momenta are discretized by the boundary conditions $j_K(k_i R)=0$.
371: The orthogonality of the basis is then satisfied by
372: \begin{eqnarray}
373: &&\int^R_0 dr r^2 j_K(k_i r)j_K(k_j r) \nonumber \\
374: &&=\int^R_0 dr r^2 j_{K\pm 1}(k_i r)j_{K\pm 1}(k_j r) \nonumber \\
375: &&=\delta_{ij}\frac{R^3}{2} [j_{K\pm 1}(k_i R)]^2 \, .
376: \label{orthogonality}
377: \end{eqnarray}
378:
379: \begin{table}
380: \caption{\label{tab:comp_clamass}The classical mass
381: for the original Kahana-Ripka basis and modified version (in MeV),
382: with $M=400$ MeV, $R=6$ fm. The error becomes of order $\sim 10^{-3}$.}
383: \begin{ruledtabular}
384: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
385: & Valence & Vacuum & Total \\ \hline
386: free & 191 & 637 & 1209 \\
387: modified & 192 & 633 & 1210 \\
388: \end{tabular}
389: \end{ruledtabular}
390: \end{table}
391:
392: Let us examine the boundary conditions for the chiral and Dirac fields
393: to construct the nuclear matter solution in the Wigner-Seitz approximation.
394: When the background chiral fields are periodic with lattice vector $\bm{a}$,
395: the quark fields would be replaced by Bloch wave functions as
396: $\psi(\bm{r}+\bm{a})=e^{i\bm{k}\cdot \bm{a}}\psi(\bm{r})$.
397: In the Wigner-Seitz approximation, however, the soliton is put on the
398: center of the spherical unit cell with the radius $R$ ($a=2R$)
399: and the dispersion $\bm{k}$ is assumed to be zero.
400: For the profile function $F(r)$, the periodicity and the unit topological
401: charge inside the cell require the boundary conditions
402: \begin{eqnarray}
403: \left.
404: \begin{array}{c}
405: ~\sigma'(0)=\sigma'(R)=0 \\
406: \pi(0)=\pi(R)=0
407: \end{array}\right\} \Rightarrow F(0)=-\pi, F(R)=0\,.
408: \end{eqnarray}
409: For the Dirac eigenstates, modification in the basis is needed.
410: For odd number of $K$, the boundary condition is same as the free case with
411: \begin{eqnarray}
412: j_K(k_i R)=0\,.
413: \end{eqnarray}
414: For even $K$, the following conditions must be satisfied
415: \begin{eqnarray}
416: j_{K+1}(k^{(a)}_i R)=0,~~{\rm for}~~ u^{(a)}_{KM},v^{(a)}_{KM}\,,\nonumber \\
417: j_{K-1}(k^{(b)}_i R)=0,~~{\rm for}~~ u^{(b)}_{KM},v^{(b)}_{KM}\,.
418: \label{mboundary}
419: \end{eqnarray}
420: Obviously the conditions (\ref{mboundary}) partially break
421: the orthogonality of the basis (\ref{orthogonality}) for the finite value of $R$.
422: However we can solve the eigenvalue problem properly (see Table \ref{tab:comp_clamass}).
423: Although the motivation is different, the similar treatment has been already introduced
424: in Ref.\cite{weigel92}.
425:
426: \begin{figure}
427: \includegraphics[height=7cm, width=9cm]{Fig2.EPS}
428: \caption{\label{fig:Fig2} Classical soliton energy and its valence and
429: vacuum contributions~(\ref{energy_static}).}
430: \end{figure}
431:
432: Fig.~1 shows the self-consistent profile functions for free ($R\to \infty$) and
433: various values of the cell radius $R$. In Fig.~2, we present the results of the
434: classical energy of the soliton and its valence and vacuum contributions
435: as functions of $R$. We find the shallow minimum of the classical energy
436: at $R\sim 1.2$ fm.
437:
438: \section{\label{sec:level5}Spurious center of mass correction\protect\\ }
439: The minimum found in Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig2} is not regarded as a true saturation
440: point because it contains the zero-point energy contributions. The quark
441: contribution to the mean-field expectation value of the square of the
442: total momentum $\bm{P}^2$ appears at the classical level although it should
443: be zero because the soliton is rest at the cell center in the present
444: approximation. Therefore, the corresponding kinetic energy should be
445: subtracted from the total energy. The effects of the spurious center
446: of mass motion is roughly estimated by the method of
447: Pobylitsa {\it et al.}~\cite{pobylitsa92}. Considering the translational
448: degrees of freedom and performing their quantization, one obtains
449: the correction at a rest frame as
450: \begin{eqnarray}
451: E_{\rm static}\to\tilde{E}_{\rm static}= E_{\rm static}-\frac{\langle \bm{P}^2\rangle}{2 E_{\rm static}}\,.
452: \label{cmcorrect}
453: \end{eqnarray}
454: The correction is easily evaluated by using the
455: numerical basis given in Eq.~(\ref{kahana_ripka}) as
456: $\bm{P}^2 u^{(a)}_{KM}(k_i r)=k_i^2 u^{(a)}_{KM}(k_i r)$.
457: As is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig3}, the minimum disappears after removing the
458: zero-point energy contributions~(\ref{cmcorrect}).
459: This is explained by the observation that the contribution of the center of
460: mass motion becomes small with increasing density (see Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig4} and the caption).
461:
462: \begin{figure}
463: \includegraphics[height=7cm, width=9cm]{Fig3.EPS}
464: \caption{\label{fig:Fig3} Classical soliton energy after removing the spurious center
465: of mass motion~(\ref{cmcorrect}). }
466: \end{figure}
467:
468: \section{\label{sec:level6}Collective quantization\protect\\ }
469: The solitons that we have obtained in the previous section are
470: classical objects and therefore must be
471: quantized to assign definite spin and isospin to them.
472: For the solitons in the free space, quantization can be
473: performed semiclassically for their rotational zero modes.
474: For the hedgehog soliton, because of its topological structure,
475: a rotation in isospin space is followed by a simultaneous spatial
476: rotation. Let us introduce the dynamically rotated chiral fields
477: \begin{eqnarray}
478: \tilde{U}(\bm{x},t)=A(t)U(\bm{x})A(t)^{\dagger},~~
479: A(t)\in {\rm SU}(2)_I\,.
480: \label{cranking}
481: \end{eqnarray}
482: In a crystal configuration, the solitons are fixed on the spatial lattice
483: point and their isospin orientation is chosen so as to minimize
484: the energy of the system. If one rotates each soliton in the crystal,
485: it changes the isospin orientation and increases the energy.
486: Thus there is only one isospin collective coordinate corresponding
487: to the overall orientation of the crystal in isospace, called global isospin,
488: in the soliton crystal~\cite{klebanov85,baskerville96}.
489:
490: The Wigner-Seitz treatment with spherical cell approximation
491: may cure the situation. Because in this approximation the information of
492: the crystalline structure, hence, the isospin structure is completely lost
493: at least in the low-density, the rotational zero-mode would be recovered.
494: Thus, we apply the zero-mode quantization method to the WS-cell
495: to estimate the nucleon and the delta mass splitting in the matter.
496:
497: By transforming the rotating frame of reference, the Dirac operator
498: with Eq.~(\ref{cranking}) can be written as
499: \begin{eqnarray}
500: \tilde{iD}= A(t){\gamma}^0 [i {\partial}_t -
501: H(U^{{\gamma}_{5}}) + \Omega]A(t)^{\dagger}
502: \end{eqnarray}
503: where
504: \begin{eqnarray}
505: \Omega=i{A^{\dagger}} \dot{A}=\frac{1}{2} \Omega^a \tau_a\,.
506: \end{eqnarray}
507: $\Omega$ is the angular velocity operators for an isorotation.
508: Assuming that the rotation of the soliton is adiabatic,
509: we shall expand the effective action $S_{\rm eff}$ around the classical
510: solution $U(\bm{x})$ with respect to the angular momentum velocity
511: $\Omega$ up to second order~\cite{biedenharn85}
512: \begin{eqnarray}
513: &&S_{\rm eff}(\tilde{U}) = S_{\rm eff}(U) \nonumber \\
514: &&-iN_c\Sp\left[
515: \log \bigl(i {\partial}_t-H
516: + \Omega\bigr)\right]
517: -\Sp\left[\log (i {\partial}_t-H)\right].\nonumber
518: \end{eqnarray}
519: With the proper-time regularization, we have
520: \begin{eqnarray}
521: S^{\rm reg}_{\rm eff}(\tilde{U})= S^{\rm reg}_{\rm eff}(U) \nonumber
522: +\frac{1}{2} \sum_{ab}\int dt \bigl[
523: I_{{\rm sea},ab} \Omega^{a}(t) \Omega^{b}(t) \bigr]
524: \end{eqnarray}
525: where $I_{{\rm sea},ab}$ is the vacuum sea contribution to the moments of inertia
526: defined by
527: \begin{eqnarray}
528: I_{{\rm sea},ab} = \frac{1}{8}N_c \sum_{\nu,\mu}f(\epsilon_\mu,\epsilon_\nu,\Lambda)
529: {\langle \nu|{\tau}_a | \mu \rangle}
530: {\langle \mu|{\tau}_b |\nu \rangle}\,,
531: \label{inertiao}
532: \end{eqnarray}
533: with the cutoff function $f(\epsilon_\mu,\epsilon_\nu,\Lambda)$
534: \begin{eqnarray}
535: &&f(\epsilon_\mu,\epsilon_\nu,\Lambda)
536: =-\frac{2\Lambda}{\sqrt{\pi}}
537: \frac{e^{-\epsilon_\mu^2/\Lambda^2}-e^{-\epsilon_\nu^2/\Lambda^2}}{\epsilon_\mu^2-\epsilon_\nu^2}
538: \nonumber \\
539: &&+\frac{{\rm sgn}(\epsilon_\mu){\rm erfc}(|\epsilon_\mu|/ \Lambda)
540: -{\rm sgn}(\epsilon_\nu){\rm erfc}(|\epsilon_\nu|/ \Lambda)}{\epsilon_\mu-\epsilon_\nu}\,. \nonumber
541: \end{eqnarray}
542: Similarly, for the valence quark contribution we have
543: \begin{eqnarray}
544: I_{{\rm val},ab} = \frac{1}{2}N_c \sum_{\mu \neq \val}
545: \frac{{\langle \val|{\tau}_a | \mu \rangle} {\langle \mu|{\tau}_b |\val \rangle}}
546: {E_\mu - E_{\rm val}}\,.
547: \label{inertiav}
548: \end{eqnarray}
549: The total moments of inertia are then given by the sum of the vacuum
550: and valence, $I_{ab} = I_{{\rm val},ab} + I_{{\rm sea},ab}$.
551: The hedgehog ansatz of the chiral fields ensure the relation for
552: the moment of inertia
553: \begin{eqnarray}
554: I_{11}=I_{22}=I_{33}.
555: \end{eqnarray}
556: \begin{figure}
557: \includegraphics[height=7cm, width=8cm]{Fig4.EPS}
558: \caption{\label{fig:Fig4} The ``upper'' $u(r)$ and the ``lower'' $w(r)$
559: component of valence quark wave functions for various cell
560: radius $R$ with the boundary condition $w(R)=0$.
561: Non vanishing values of upper component at the cell boundary $u(R)$
562: come from the zero-mode elements in the basis. }
563: \end{figure}
564: The quantization condition for the collective coordinate, $A(t)$,
565: define a body-fixed isospin operator $\bm{K}$ as
566: \begin{eqnarray}
567: &&I_{ab} {\Omega}^{b} \rightarrow -
568: \tr \bigg( A \frac{ {\tau}_a }{2} \frac{\partial}{\partial A} \biggr)
569: \equiv -k_a\,,
570: \label{qcondition}
571: \end{eqnarray}
572: These are related to the usual coordinate-fixed isospin
573: operator $i_a$ by transformation,
574: \begin{equation}
575: i_{a}=- \frac{1}{2}{\rm Tr}[\tau_aA(t)\tau^b A(t)^{\dagger}]k_b.
576: \label{orthotrans}
577: \end{equation}
578: To estimate the quantum energy corrections, let us introduce
579: the basis functions of the spin and isospin operators which
580: were inspired from the cranking method for
581: nuclei~\cite{bohr},
582: \begin{eqnarray*}
583: &&\langle A|{i{i}_{3}{k}_{3}}\rangle
584: =\sqrt{\frac{2i+1}{8\pi^2}}(-1)^{i+i_3}
585: D^{i}_{-i_{3}k_{3}}(A)
586: \end{eqnarray*}
587: where $D$ is the Wigner rotation matrix. Finally, we find the
588: quantized energies of the soliton as
589: \begin{eqnarray}
590: &&E=E_{\rm static}+\frac{i(i+1)}{2I_{33}}
591: \label{qenergy}
592: \end{eqnarray}
593: where $i(i+1)$ is eigenvalues of the Casimir operator
594: $\bm{i}^{2}$.
595: \begin{figure}
596: \includegraphics[height=7cm, width=9cm]{Fig5.EPS}
597: \caption{\label{fig:Fig5} Moment of inertia : the vacuum
598: (\ref{inertiao}) and the valence (\ref{inertiav})
599: contribution and their sum. }
600: \end{figure}
601: The moment of inertia for the vacuum (\ref{inertiao})
602: and valence (\ref{inertiav}) and their sum are given in Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig5}.
603: In Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig6}, we present the energy of
604: nucleon ($i=\frac{1}{2}$) and $\Delta$ ($i=\frac{3}{2}$).
605:
606: In this cranking procedure, the zero-point energy of the
607: rotational motion $ \langle\bm {i^2}\rangle / 2I_{33}
608: $ must be removed from Eq.~(\ref{qenergy})~\cite{cohen86,pobylitsa92}.
609: Finally, we obtain the mass of nucleon and delta
610: \begin{eqnarray}
611: E_N=\tilde{E}_{\rm static}-\frac{3}{4I_{33}}\,, \label{qmassn} \\
612: E_\Delta=\tilde{E}_{\rm static}+\frac{3}{4I_{33}}\,. \label{qmassd}
613: \end{eqnarray}
614: Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig7} shows the energy of nucleon and delta after
615: subtracting the spurious zero-point energy.
616: The minimum for nucleon is observed at $R\sim 1.8$ fm which corresponds
617: to the density $\rho_N \sim 0.04~{\rm fm}^{-3}$. This value is much lower
618: than the experimental value.
619: The binding energy is $E_{B}\sim 18$ MeV which is not
620: far from the experimental observation.
621: For $\Delta$, we also find the shallow minima at $R\sim 1.22$ fm
622: which corresponds to $\rho_\Delta \sim 0.13~{\rm fm}^{-3}$.
623: The $\Delta$ saturation is attained at the density $\rho_\Delta/\rho_N\sim 3.2$
624: which is close to the prediction of density $\rho_\Delta/\rho_N\sim 2-3$
625: in the framework of the quantum hadrodynamics~\cite{waldhauser87,li97}.
626: The advantage of our approach is that the model does not require any
627: tuning parameter for the $\Delta$ spectra in the hadrodynamics calculations.
628:
629: \begin{figure}
630: \includegraphics[height=7cm, width=9cm]{Fig6.EPS}
631: \caption{\label{fig:Fig6} Quantized soliton energies of nucleon $N$
632: and delta resonance $\Delta(1232)$~(\ref{qenergy}).}
633: \end{figure}
634:
635: \section{\label{sec:level7}Summary\protect\\ }
636: We have studied soliton solutions in nuclear medium by using the Wigner-Seitz
637: approximation. The chiral quark soliton model was used to obtain the classical
638: soliton solution. In this letter we especially focused on the properties of nucleon
639: and $\Delta$ in matter. We quantized the soliton semiclassically. The adiabatic
640: rotation for the (iso-)rotational zero mode was performed
641: and the nuclear saturation points were obtained for nucleon and $\Delta$ matter.
642:
643: \begin{figure}
644: \includegraphics[height=7cm, width=9cm]{Fig7.EPS}
645: \caption{\label{fig:Fig7} Masses of $N,\Delta$,
646: after spurious energy subtractions~(\ref{qmassn})-(\ref{qmassd}).}
647: \end{figure}
648:
649: \begin{figure}
650: \includegraphics[height=7cm, width=9cm]{Fig8.EPS}
651: \caption{\label{fig:Fig8} Binding energy of nucleon for
652: the various constituent quark mass $M$ (in MeV).}
653: \end{figure}
654:
655: \begin{figure}
656: \includegraphics[height=7cm, width=9cm]{Fig9.EPS}
657: \caption{\label{fig:Fig9} Kinetic energy of the pion~(\ref{kineticpi}).}
658: \end{figure}
659:
660: Here we did not consider the following effects
661: which should be investigated to develop our understanding of the dense nuclear matter:
662: \begin{itemize}
663: \item band structure of the quarks
664: \item $R$ dependence of the constituent quark mass $M$ and the cutoff parameter
665: for the vacuum $\Lambda$
666: \item inclusion of the heavier mesons ($\rho,\omega,\cdots$) to the soliton solutions
667: \item improvement of the correction by the zero point energy and Casimir effects
668: \item quark-meson couplings and the Fermi motion of the baryons
669: \item crystalline order in high density phase
670: \item $SU(3)$ extension.
671: \end{itemize}
672: As is expected, our model provides much lower value of the saturation
673: density than the experiment. In this analysis, the Wigner-Seitz cell is
674: approximated by a sphere and thus high density matter is attained
675: by shrinking the cell volume with the spherical shape of each soliton
676: unchanged. However, in reality, the neighborhood solitons start to overlap
677: and the structure will be deformed from uniform nuclear matter at high density.
678: In this phase, the hedgehog ansatz should not be appropriate any more.
679:
680: We observed the increase in the zero mode of the center of mass motion
681: of the soliton for higher density, which means that
682: the soliton tends to rest in the WS approximation.
683: In this case, we should employ the exact WS cell which reflects
684: the background crystal symmetry instead of sphere, to get higher
685: saturation density.
686: The inclusion of band effects may also improve our results.
687: In Ref.~\cite{barnea00}, the authors imposed the Bloch-like
688: boundary conditions on the s-wave valence quark wave function
689: and estimated the soliton energy self-consistently.
690: They found that the effects of the admixtures of higher states are
691: small except for the scalar quark density.
692: In fact, the band structure will appear at some critical density
693: and the correction for the quantum energy may become more
694: important at the dense medium because the radius of the soliton, that is,
695: the moment of inertia, strongly depend on the position of the band~\cite{amore00}.
696:
697: Generally speaking, the constituent quark mass $M$ is momentum- and
698: density-dependent~\cite{diakonov88}. We chose the value $M=420$ MeV as
699: it reproduces the free nucleon observable.
700: In Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig8}, one can see that for larger value of $M$,
701: the saturation point goes to inward and the binding becomes deeper.
702: Varying the value of $M$ for each density may give a better result for
703: the saturation point.
704:
705: An important feature of the nucleon in a matter is about its size. It is believed that
706: the nucleon will swell in the medium.
707: The authors of Ref.~\cite{christov93} observe such effect
708: with reducing effective quark mass $M^{*}$ in the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio type quark-soliton model.
709: We confirmed within our model that
710: as smaller the $M$, the size of the soliton increases.
711: But in that case, the saturation becomes shallow (Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig8}).
712: Recently, we investigated soliton solutions in the CQSM taking into
713: account $\rho,\omega$ mesons which will improve the short distance physics.
714: We are able to obtain deeper binding energy as decreasing the value of $M$.
715: We will report it on forthcoming article.
716:
717: In Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig6}, one finds that the spectra of nucleon and $\Delta$
718: are too small compared to the experimental values. Obviously it is due to the
719: subtraction of the zero-point corrections. A little more sophisticated approach of
720: the spurious motion is performed in Ref.~\cite{barnea00} and by applying
721: this approach to our analysis, the results will be improved to a certain extent.
722: Also, the meson coupling to the quark inside nucleon and $\Delta$ should be
723: important to shift the minima at higher density.
724:
725: In Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig6} and Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig7}, one finds the nucleon-$\Delta$
726: mass difference gradually decreases as matter density increases and eventually
727: it vanishes. The reduction in the mass difference has been observed
728: previously in a similar chiral soliton model but employing somewhat
729: different projection technique for quantum number~\cite{arriola89, christov90}.
730: In the present formulation, the behavior is not fully understood
731: because it should be explained by the dynamics of hadrons, that is, QCD.
732: In the naive $SU(6)$ quark model, the mass difference is ascribed to
733: the hyperfine splitting~\cite{glashow75}. The reduction may imply
734: the increase of the distance between quarks.
735: In fact, in Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig4}, one can see the concentration of
736: the quarks at the cell boundary as the density increases.
737:
738: Alternatively, if we understand the $\Delta$ as a composite object (resonance state)
739: of the nucleon and pion, the mass difference can be interpreted as the energy of pions
740: bound to the nucleon. Although it is absent in the present formulation,
741: the pion kinetic energy inside the soliton can be estimated as
742: \begin{eqnarray}
743: E_{\pi}&=&\frac{f_\pi^2}{4}\int d^3x {\rm tr}\partial_k U^\dagger \partial_k U \nonumber \\
744: &=& 2\pi f_{\pi}^2\int^R_0 r^2dr\biggl(F'(r)^2+\frac{\sin^2 F(r)}{r^2}\biggr).
745: \label{kineticpi}
746: \end{eqnarray}
747: In Ref.~\cite{amore00}, the authors introduced the $r$- and the cutoff parameter of the vacuum
748: $\Lambda$-dependent form of the pion decay constant $f_\pi(r,\Lambda)$
749: and estimated its density dependence with the $\Lambda$ whose value is set
750: for the free space value of $f_\pi$.
751: The $f_\pi(r,\Lambda)$ determined in such a way is essentially valid only for the
752: free space limit $R\to\infty$.
753: Therefore we shall simply take the value in free space $f_{\pi}=93$ MeV.
754: Fig.~\ref{fig:Fig9} shows the result of the kinetic energy of pions
755: as a function of $R$ and one can observe that the energy is
756: reduced as the density increases. This reduction of the pion kinetic energy
757: may contribute to the reduction of the mass difference.
758:
759: Our formulation is directly applicable to the $SU(3)$ octet-decuplet baryon
760: spectra in nuclear matter~\cite{weigel92,blotz93}.
761: After the above effects are properly incorporated and more
762: realistic estimation of the saturation points is achieved,
763: it will be interesting to study the $SU(3)$.
764:
765: \begin{thebibliography}{qq}
766: \bibitem{klebanov85}
767: Igor Klebanov, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 262}, 133 (1985).
768: \bibitem{wust87}
769: E. W\"ust, B. E. Brown and A. D. Jackson,
770: Nucl. Phys. A {\bf 468}, 450 (1987).
771: \bibitem{manton87}
772: Alfred S. Goldhaber and N. S. Manton,
773: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 19}, 231 (1987).
774: \bibitem{castillejo89}
775: L. Castillejo, P. S. Jones, A. D. Jackson,
776: J. J. M. Verbaarschot and A. Jackson,
777: Nucl. Phys. A {\bf 501}, 450 (1987).
778: \bibitem{kugler89}
779: M. Kugler and S. Shtrikman,
780: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 40}, 3421 (1989).
781: \bibitem{park02}
782: Byung-Yoon Park, Dong-Pil Min, Mannque Rho and
783: Vincente Vento, Nucl. Phys. A {\bf 707}, 381 (2002).
784: \bibitem{achtzehnter85}
785: Joachim Achtzehnter, Werner Scheid and Lawrence Wilets,
786: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 32}, 2414 (1985).
787: \bibitem{banerjee85}
788: B. Banerjee, N. K. Glendenning and V. Soni,
789: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 155}, 213 (1985).
790: \bibitem{glendenning86}
791: N. K. Glendenning and B. Banerjee,
792: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 34}, 1072 (1986).
793: \bibitem{hahn87}
794: Detlev Hahn and Norman K. Glendenning,
795: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 36}, 1181 (1987).
796: \bibitem{weber98}
797: Urban Weber and Judith A. McGovern,
798: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 57}, 3376 (1998).
799: \bibitem{reinhardt85}
800: H. Reinhardt, B. V. Dang, and H. Schulz,
801: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 159}, 161 (1985).
802: \bibitem{birse88}
803: M. C. Birse, J. J. Rehr and L. Wilets,
804: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 38}, 359 (1988).
805: \bibitem{barnea00}
806: Nir Barnea, Timothy S. Walhout,
807: Nucl. Phys. A {\bf 677}, 367 (2000).
808: \bibitem{Kutschera84}
809: M. Kutschera, C. J. Pethick and D. G. Ravenhall,
810: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 53}, 1041 (1984).
811: \bibitem{diakonov88}
812: D. I. Diakonov, V. Yu. Petrov, and P. V. Pobylitsa,
813: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 306}, 809 (1988).
814: \bibitem{reinhardt88}
815: H. Reinhardt and R. W\"unsch , Phys. Lett. {\bf B 215,} 577 (1988).
816: \bibitem{meissner89}
817: Th. Meissner, F. Gr\"ummer, and K. Goeke,
818: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 227}, 296 (1989).
819: \bibitem{report} For detailed reviews of the model see: \\
820: R.\ Alkofer, H.\ Reinhardt and H.\ Weigel, Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 265}, 139 (1996);\\
821: Chr.\ V.\ Christov, A.\ Blotz, H.-C.Kim, P.\ Pobylitsa, T.\ Watabe, Th.\ Meissner,
822: E.\ Ruiz Arriola, K.\ Goeke, Prog.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 37}, 91 (1996).
823: \bibitem{diakonov97} D. Diakonov, V. Petrov and M. Polyakov, Z. Phys. A
824: {\bf 359}, 305 (1997).
825: \bibitem{nakano03} T. Nakano {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 91}, 012002
826: (2003).
827: \bibitem{amore00}
828: P. Amore and A. De Pace,
829: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 61}, 055201 (2000).
830: \bibitem{adjali92}
831: I. Adjali, I. J. Aitchison, and J. A. Zuk,
832: Nucl. Phys. A {\bf 537}, 457 (1992).
833: \bibitem{kahana84}
834: S. Kahana and G. Ripka, Nucl. Phys. A {\bf 429}, 462 (1984).
835: \bibitem{wakamatsu91}
836: M. Wakamatsu and H. Yoshiki, Nucl. Phys. A {\bf 524}, 561 (1991).
837: \bibitem{weigel92}
838: H. Weigel, R. Alkofer and H. Reinhardt,
839: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 387}, 638 (1992).
840: \bibitem{pobylitsa92}
841: P. V. Pobylitsa, E. Ruiz Arriola, Th. Meissner, F. Gr\"ummer,
842: K. Goeke and W. Broniowski, J. Phys. G {\bf 18}, 1455 (1992).
843: \bibitem{baskerville96}
844: W.K.Baskerville, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 380}, 106 (1996).
845: \bibitem{biedenharn85}
846: L. C. Biedenharn, Y. Dothan and M. Tarlini,
847: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 31}, 649 (1985).
848: \bibitem{cohen86}
849: Thomas D. Cohen and Wojciech Broniowski,
850: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 34}, 3472 (1986).
851: \bibitem{bohr}
852: A. Bohr and B. Mottelson, {\it Nuclear structure, Vol.II}
853: (World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, Singapore, 1998).
854: \bibitem{waldhauser87}
855: B. M. Waldhauser, J. Theis, J. A. Maruhn, H. St\"ocker, and
856: W. Greiner,
857: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 36}, 1019 (1987).
858: \bibitem{li97}
859: Zhuxia Li, Guangjun Mao, Yizhong Zhuo, and Walter Greiner,
860: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 56}, 1570 (1997).
861: \bibitem{christov93}
862: Chr.V.Christov, K.Goeke,
863: Nucl. Phys. A {\bf 564}, 551 (1993).
864: \bibitem{arriola89}
865: E.Ruiz Arriola, Chr.V.Christov and K. Goeke,
866: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 225}, 22 (1989).
867: \bibitem{christov90}
868: Chr.V.Christov, M. Fiolhais, E.Ruiz Arriola and K. Goeke,
869: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 243}, 333 (1990).
870: \bibitem{glashow75}
871: A. De Rujula, H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow,
872: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 75},147 (1975).
873: \bibitem{blotz93}
874: A.\ Blotz, D.\ Diakonov, K.\ Goeke, N.\ W.\ Park, V.\ Petrov
875: and P.\ V.\ Pobylitsa, Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 555}, 765 (1993).
876: \end{thebibliography}
877: \end{document}
878:
879:
880: