1: %\documentstyle{elsarts}

2: \documentclass[aps,prc,tightenlines,showpacs,preprint,%

3: amssymb,byrevtex,nofootinbib,superscriptaddress]{revtex4}  %endfloats

4: 

5: %\usepackage{epsfig,bm,amsmath}

6: 

7: \usepackage{epsfig,bm,dcolumn}

8: 

9: \begin{document}

10: 

11: \title{Quarkonium-Hadron Interactions in Perturbative QCD}

12: \author{Taesoo Song}

13: \email[Electronic mail:]{songtsoo@yonsei.ac.kr}

14: \author{Su Houng Lee}

15: \email[Electronic mail:]{suhoung@phya.yonsei.ac.kr}

16: \affiliation{IPAP and Department of Physics,

17:         Yonsei University, Seoul 120-749 Korea}

18: 

19: \date{\today}

20: 

21: % ============ Abstract  ========================

22: \begin{abstract}

23: The next to leading order (NLO) quarkonium-hadron cross section is

24: calculated in perturbative QCD.  The corresponding leading order

25: (LO) result was performed by Peskin more than 20 years ago using

26: the operator product expansion (OPE).   In this work, the

27: calculation is performed using the Bethe-Salpeter amplitude and

28: the factorization formula.  The soft divergence appearing in the

29: intermediate stages of the calculations are shown to vanish after

30: adding all possible crossed terms, while the collinear divergences

31: are eliminated by mass factorization.  Applying the result to the

32: Upsilon system, one finds that there are large higher order

33: correction near the threshold.   The relevance of the present

34: result to the charmonium case is also discussed.

35: \end{abstract}

36: 

37: \pacs{25.75.-q, 12.38.Bx, 13.75.-n, 13.85.Lg }

38: 

39: \maketitle

40: 

41: % ============ Body  ========================

42: \section{INTRODUCTION}

43: 

44: Twenty five years ago, Peskin \cite{peskin}, and Bhanot and Peskin

45: \cite{Bhanot} showed that in the heavy quark limit, the

46: interaction between a hadron and a heavy quark bound state could

47: be described in perturbative QCD, and calculated the dissociation

48: cross section of the quarkonium by a hadron to leading order (LO).

49: According to their calculation, which was based on operator

50: product expansion (OPE), the  $J/\psi$ dissociation cross section

51: by a hadron was found to be very small and in the order of

52: $\mu$barn in the threshold region.   Later the result was

53: re-derived and the target mass correction

54: calculated\cite{Kharzeev94,Kharzeev96,Arleo,Oh}, but the

55: qualitative result remained the same.   Initially, such small

56: cross section strongly supported that the $J/\psi$ suppression

57: seen in relativistic heavy ion collision at SPS was a consequence

58: of QGP(quark gluon plasma) formation\cite{Kharzeev1}.   On the

59: other hand, other approaches, such as the quark exchange model

60: \cite{quark-exchange,barnes1}, the meson exchange model

61: \cite{meson-exchange,Haglin,Lin,Oh1,Ivanov,Sibirtsev,Navarra}, the

62: QCD sum rule method\cite{Nielsen1,Nielsen2,Nielsen3}, and other

63: non perturbative methods\cite{Dosch99}, predicted a much larger

64: cross section of few mbarn. The discrepancy is particulary large

65: near the threshold region \cite{Lee}.   Although the model

66: calculations themselves have large uncertainties and model

67: dependencies,  it is generally believed that such discrepancy

68: exists because the QCD LO calculation, especially near threshold,

69: is valid only for a very large quark mass, larger than that of the

70: bottom quark.  However, no systematic analysis has been worked out

71: in this context, as the formalism based on the OPE is quite

72: complicated even in the LO.

73: 

74: A few years ago, Oh, Kim, and Lee \cite{Oh} used Bethe-Salpeter

75: amplitude and factorization formula to reproduce Peskin's result

76: on the dissociation cross section.  Because this method is

77: relatively simple, it opened the possibility to calculate the

78: higher order correction, which will be carried out in the present

79: work.

80: 

81: There are two types of initial and final states in the NLO

82: calculation.  One is $\Phi + q \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ q$, and

83: the other is $\Phi + g \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ g$, where $\Phi$

84: is a quarkonium.  In the course of the calculations, collinear

85: divergence, infrared divergence, and soft-collinear divergence

86: appear.  Infrared divergence disappear after adding the one loop

87: diagram with $Q + \bar{Q}$ final state, while the

88: %Ultraviolet divergence

89: %from one loop correction is eliminated by coupling constant

90: %renormalizaton.

91: collinear divergence is eliminated by mass factorization.

92: Dimensional regularization in the $\overline{MS}$ scheme is used

93: throughout this work, including the parton distribution function.

94: The counting scheme, introduced by Peskin, to systematically study

95: heavy bound states is used and applied to NLO.

96: %And also $\overline{MS}$ scheme parton distribution function

97: %is used for consistent output.

98: In addition, the large $N_c$ limit are taken throughout this work.

99: 

100: In Section 2, the Bethe-salpeter amplitude and the LO calculation

101: are reviewed. In Section 3, the elementary cross section of $\Phi

102: + q \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ q$ is calculated and mass

103: factorization is introduced. In Section 4, the calculation for the

104: $\Phi + g \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ g$ process is presented. The

105: effective four point vertex is introduced in section 5.  It is

106: then shown how the infrared divergences disappear when the

107: relevant crossed terms of Born and one loop correction are

108: included.  Mass factorizations in the process $\Phi + g

109: \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ g$ are presented separately when the

110: emitted gluons are hard and soft in section 4 and 5 respectively.

111: In Section 6, the result is applied to the upsilon dissociation

112: cross section. Limitations when applied to the charmonium case is

113: also discussed briefly. Appendix A summarizes the 2 and 3-body

114: phase space. Appendix B contains the derivation and the list of

115: angular integration used in the present work.  Appendix C gives

116: detailed calculations of $\Phi + g \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ g$

117: diagrams. Appendix D gives some comments about order counting.

118: 

119: 

120: \section{LO ($\Phi + g \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}$) calculation}

121: 

122: Here, the LO result, re-derived by OKL\cite{Oh} using the

123: Bethe-Salpeter amplitude, is presented again for completeness.

124: 

125: The Bethe-Salpeter equation, represented diagrammatically in

126: Fig.~(\ref{fig:BS}), is written as

127: 

128: \begin{eqnarray}

129: \Gamma_\mu (p_1,-p_2)&=&-ig^2 C_F \int \frac{d^4 K}{(2 \pi)^4}

130: \gamma^\alpha i\Delta(K+p_1+p_2) \Gamma_\mu

131: (K+p_1+p_2,K)\nonumber\\

132: &&\times i\Delta(K) \gamma_\alpha V(K+p_2),

133: \end{eqnarray}

134: where $C_F=(N_c^2-1)/N_c$, $i\Delta(K)$ is the quark propagator,

135: and $i V(K)$ the gluon propagator.

136: 

137: % ------------ Figure 1. ------------------------

138: \begin{figure}

139: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{definition.eps}}\caption{The

140: Bethe-Salpeter equation for quarkonium}\label{fig:BS}

141: \end{figure}

142: % ----------------------------------------------

143: 

144: In the heavy quark limit, the $K_0$ contour integration is

145: dominated by the residue at $k_0=-m-\vec{K}^2/2m+i\varepsilon$

146: over that at $k_0=-q_0-m-\vec{K}^2/2m+i\varepsilon$. In this

147: limit, $V(K+p_2)$ becomes three dimensional,

148: \begin{eqnarray}

149: V(K+p_2)|_{K_0=-m-\vec{K}^2/2m} \simeq

150: \frac{1}{|\vec{K}+\vec{p_2}|^2}.

151: \end{eqnarray}

152: 

153: If further, $\bar{\phi}_\mu(q,\vec{p})$ is defined as,

154: \begin{eqnarray}

155: &&\int \frac{p_0}{2\pi}i\Delta(p_1)\Gamma_\mu (p_1,-p_2)

156: i\Delta(-p_2)\equiv \bar{\phi}_\mu (q,\vec{p}),

157: \end{eqnarray}

158: where $q=p_1+p_2$, $p\equiv(p_1-p_2)/2$, the Bethe-Salpeter

159: equation becomes,

160: \begin{eqnarray}

161: \bar{\phi}_\mu(q,\vec{p})&=& i g^2 C_F \int

162: \frac{dp_0}{2\pi}\Delta(p_1)\bigg[ \int \frac{d^3

163: K}{(2\pi)^3}\gamma^\alpha \bar{\phi}_\mu (q,\vec{K}+\vec{q}/2)

164: \gamma_\alpha \frac{1}{|\vec{K}-\vec{p}|^2}\bigg]

165: \Delta(-p_2)\nonumber\\

166: &\simeq& -\frac{g^2 C_F}{\epsilon_o+\vec{p}^2/m} \int \frac{d^3

167: K}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma^\alpha \bar{\phi}_\mu

168: (q,\vec{K}) \gamma_\alpha \frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}

169: \frac{1}{|\vec{K}-\vec{p}|^2},

170: \end{eqnarray}

171: in the heavy quark limit and in the $q$ rest frame.

172: $\epsilon_o=2m-m_\Phi$ is the binding energy of the quarkonium. If

173: we assume $\bar{\phi}_\mu(q,\vec{p})$ to have a structure of $

174: \frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i g^i_\mu

175: \frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}\psi(|\vec{p}|)$, the Bethe-Salpeter equation

176: reduces to the nonrelativistic Schr$\ddot{o}$dinger equation for

177: the Coulombic bound state,

178: 

179: \begin{eqnarray}

180: (\epsilon_o+\vec{p}^2/m)\psi(|\vec{p}|)=  g^2 C_F \int \frac{d^3

181: K}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1}{|\vec{K}|^2}\psi(|\vec{K}+\vec{p}|)\label{hardg},

182: \end{eqnarray}

183: whose spatial form is,

184: \begin{eqnarray}

185: \bigg[ \frac{1}{2\mu} \nabla^2 -\frac{g^2

186: C_F}{4\pi}\frac{1}{r}\bigg] \psi(r)=\epsilon \psi(r)\label{BS},

187: \end{eqnarray}

188: where $\mu=m/2$ is the reduced mass.

189: 

190: At the same time, the Bethe-Salpeter vertex reduces to

191: \begin{eqnarray}

192: \Gamma_\mu\bigg(\frac{q}{2}+p,-\frac{q}{2}+p\bigg) &=&

193: \bigg(\epsilon_o+\frac{\vec{p}^2}{m}\bigg)\psi(|\vec{p}|)\sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}

194: \frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i g^i_\mu

195: \frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}.\label{bsv}

196: \end{eqnarray}

197: 

198: Fig.~(\ref{fig:lo}) is the leading order diagrams for quarkonium

199: dissocation $\Phi + g \rightarrow Q +\bar{Q}$. Among them, the

200: first three diagrams are of the same order in the large $N_c$

201: limit, while the last two diagrams are suppressed by $1/N_c$. Such

202: $N_c$ countings are easily obtained using the double quark line

203: representation for the gluon lines, since one notes that compared

204: to the first two diagrams, the third diagram has additionally a

205: quark loop and two factors of $g$.  This altogether gives a factor

206: of $N_c g^2$, which scales as $O(1)$ in the large $N_c$ limit, as

207: the coupling $g $ scales as $1/(N_c)^{\frac{1}{2}}$.  In contrast,

208: the last two diagrams do not have an additional quark loop while

209: they have the two additional factors of $g$, and hence are

210: suppressed by $1/N_c$ compared to the third diagram. Technically,

211: this can be rephrased in terms of color matrices, as the last two

212: diagrams carry the color factor $T^b T^a T^b = -T^a/(2N_c)$ and

213: hence is suppressed by $1/N_c$ compared to third diagram\cite{Oh}.

214: 

215: The counting scheme in scales starts from noting that the binding

216: energy $\epsilon_o=m(N_c g^2/16\pi)^2 \sim O(mg^4)$.  This

217: suggests from Eq.~(\ref{hardg}) that the three momenta of the

218: heavy quarks are of $O(mg^2)$.   The next important step is to

219: take the external gluon momentum $|\vec{k}|$ and its energy $k^0$

220: to be of $O(mg^4)$, which are smaller than the typical heavy quark

221: momentum of $O(mg^2)$ inside the bound state. This is the essence

222: of the factorization in the present approach; namely, the

223: separation scale is taken to be of $O(mg^4)$ so that the bound

224: state property of $O(mg^2)$ can be taken into account as Wilson

225: coefficients.

226: %even when they are on shell as in Fig.~(\ref{fig:lo})\footnote{Due

227: %to the coulomb wave function, the case where the three momentum of

228: %the outgoing heavy quark is of different order is exponentially

229: %suppressed}. Moreover,

230: Then, from the energy conservation $m_\Phi+k_0=

231: 2m+|\vec{p_1}|^2/2m +|\vec{p_2}|^2/2m$,  one has \cite{peskin},

232: \begin{eqnarray}

233: |\vec{p_1}|\sim |\vec{p_2}|\sim O(mg^2), \ \ \ \ \

234: k^0=|\vec{k}|\sim O(mg^4). \label{counting-scheme}

235: \end{eqnarray}

236: 

237: Counting in the NLO process $\Phi + q(g)\rightarrow

238: Q+\bar{Q}+q(g)$ are obtained similarly by assuming that the

239: incoming and outgoing parton momentum are of $O(mg^4)$.  That is,

240: 

241: \begin{eqnarray}

242: |\vec{p_1}|\sim |\vec{p_2}|\sim O(mg^2), \ \ \ \ \

243: k_1^0=|\vec{k_1}|\sim k_2^0=|\vec{k_2}|\sim O(mg^4),\label{gorder}

244: \end{eqnarray}

245: where $k_1$ is the incoming quark (gluon) momentum, and $k_2$ is

246: the outgoing quark (gluon) momentum.  Under this order counting

247: scheme, quark propagators are expanded as below.

248: 

249: \begin{eqnarray}

250: \Delta(p+k)&=&\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\frac{1}{k_0+i\varepsilon}

251: +\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\frac{\vec{p}\cdot\vec{k}}{m

252: (k_0+i\varepsilon)^2}+\frac{\not{\vec{p}}}{2mk_0+i\varepsilon}\nonumber\\

253: \Delta(p-k)&=&\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\frac{-1}{k_0-i\varepsilon}

254: +\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\frac{-\vec{p}\cdot\vec{k}}{m

255: (k_0-i\varepsilon)^2}+\frac{\not{\vec{p}}}{-2mk_0+i\varepsilon}\nonumber\\

256: \Delta(-p+k)&=&\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}\frac{-1}{k_0-i\varepsilon}

257: +\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}\frac{-\vec{p}\cdot\vec{k}}{m

258: (k_0-i\varepsilon)^2}+\frac{\not{\vec{p}}}{2mk_0-i\varepsilon}\nonumber\\

259: \Delta(-p-k)&=&\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}\frac{1}{k_0+i\varepsilon}

260: +\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}\frac{\vec{p}\cdot\vec{k}}{m

261: (k_0+i\varepsilon)^2}+\frac{-\not{\vec{p}}}{2mk_0+i\varepsilon}\label{qpropa}

262: \end{eqnarray}

263: Here, $p$ is the on-shell momentum of heavy quark.  The first term

264: is of $1/mg^4$ order, and the next two terms are $1/mg^2$ order.

265: The third diagram of Fig.~(\ref{fig:lo}) seems to be higher order

266: than previous two diagrams with respect to the coupling $g$. But

267: they are of same order under above counting scheme. Detail is

268: given in Appendix D.

269: 

270: 

271: Using the Bethe-Salpeter amplitude Eq.~(\ref{bsv}) and the heavy

272: quark propagators Eq.~(\ref{qpropa}), the leading order amplitude

273: may be derived as,

274: 

275: % ------------ Figure 2. ------------------------

276: \begin{figure}

277: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=12cm]{lo.eps}}\caption{Leading

278: order diagrams for $\Phi+g \rightarrow Q+\bar{Q}$. The two lower

279: diagrams are suppressed in large $N_c$ limit.}\label{fig:lo}

280: \end{figure}

281: % ----------------------------------------------

282: 

283: \begin{eqnarray}

284: M^{\mu \nu}_{LO}=-g \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}} \bigg(

285: \vec{k_1}\cdot \frac{

286: \partial \psi ( \vec{p})} {\partial \vec{p}}

287: g^{\nu 0} + k_{10} \frac{\partial \psi(\vec{p})}{\partial p_j }

288: g^{\nu j} \bigg) g^{\mu i} \nonumber\\ \times \overline{u}(p_1

289: )\frac{1+\gamma_0 }{2} \gamma_i \frac{1-\gamma_0}{2} T^a v(p_2 ).

290: \label{lo}

291: \end{eqnarray}

292: 

293: The total cross section then becomes

294: \begin{eqnarray}

295: \sigma_{\Phi - g}(\lambda)=\frac{2^7

296: g^2}{3N_c}a_o^2\frac{\bigg(\frac{\lambda}{\epsilon_o}-1\bigg)^{\frac{3}{2}}}

297: {\bigg(\frac{\lambda}{\epsilon_o}\bigg)^5},\label{locs}

298: \end{eqnarray}

299: where $\lambda=q \cdot k_1/m_\Phi$, and the quarkonium is assumed

300: to be in the coulombic $1S$ state,

301: \begin{eqnarray}

302: \nabla \psi_{1s}(\vec{p})=ia_o^{\frac{5}{2}} 32

303: \sqrt{\pi}\frac{a_o\vec{p}}{(|a_o\vec{p}|^2+1)^3},\label{wavef}

304: \end{eqnarray}

305: and $a_o = 16 \pi / (g^2 N_c m)$ is the Bohr radius. The coupling

306: $g$ and the heavy quark mass $m$ are determined by fitting the

307: measured quarkonium spectrum, such as $\psi$ and $\psi'$ for the

308: charmonium states, with those of the coulomb bound states.

309: Details of the derivations are given in ref. \cite{Oh}.

310: 

311: The hadronic cross section is obtained by folding the partonic

312: cross section with the parton distribution function, using the

313: factorization formula,

314: \begin{eqnarray}

315: \sigma_{\Phi\ h}(\lambda) = \int^1_0 dx \sigma_{\Phi - parton} (x

316: \lambda,Q) D_{parton} (x,Q), \label{fac-theorem}

317: \end{eqnarray}

318: where $x$ is the momentum fraction of a parton, and $Q$ is the

319: separation scale.   As has been stated earlier, the scale $Q$ is

320: set to be the binding energy, which is of $O(mg^4)$, then it is

321: natural to include the `bound state' properties obtained from

322: momentum scale of $O(mg^2)$ in the Wilson coefficient.

323: 

324: At this point, it should be noted that the factorization theorem

325: in Eq.(\ref{fac-theorem}) is valid only when the mass of the quark

326: is very large, so that the binding energy of  $O(mg^4)$ becomes

327: larger than the typical hard scale $> 1$ GeV.  Otherwise, the two

328: standard sets of corrections will not be small.  Namely, the

329: higher order correction to the perturbative cross section will not

330: converge and the higher twist effects will not be negligible.

331: 

332: If the heavy quark is not sufficiently heavy, the time scale

333: involved in forming the bound state will not be short enough

334: compared to the typical time scale involved for the bound state to

335: interact with the external partons, and hence, the contributions

336: from multiple gluonic interactions will not be negligible. Such

337: multiple gluonic effects correspond to the higher twist effects.

338: Moreover, even if one calculates the Wilson coefficients for such

339: higher twist effects, nothing much is known about the higher twist

340: distribution functions inside the hadrons, and the corresponding

341: contribution to the hadronic cross sections can not be calculated.

342: 

343: The perturbative cross section of the leading twist also has its

344: own problems when the quark mass is not heavy enough.  To begin

345: with, to implement Eq.(\ref{fac-theorem}) at the separation scale

346: $Q=\epsilon_o$, one needs the parton distribution function

347: $D_{parton}(x,\epsilon)$ defined at that scale.  Moreover, the

348: perturbative calculation for the leading order cross section

349: $\sigma_{\Phi-parton}(x\lambda,\epsilon)$ may not be convergent.

350: Nonetheless, all such questions can be answered by the explicit

351: NLO calculation, which will provide an quantitative estimate of

352: the correction to the LO cross section, and also determine the

353: valid energy range of the LO cross section.

354: 

355: The binding energies for both the charmonium and the Upsilon

356: systems are around 0.75 GeV, and the aforementioned corrections

357: are potentially not small.  However, by applying our formal NLO

358: calculation to the Upsilon system, we will investigate the

359: convergence and the valid energy range  of the leading twist cross

360: section.   As for the parton distribution function, we will use

361: the MRST parton distribution function at its minimum scale

362: $Q^2=1.25$ GeV$^2$, and investigate its uncertainty due to the

363: variation in the scale to larger values.

364: 

365: \section{NLO process $\Phi + q \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ q$}

366: 

367: \subsection{Collinear divergent elementary cross section}

368: 

369: % ------------ Figure 3. ------------------------

370: \begin{figure}

371: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=12cm]{nlo1.eps}}\caption{Next

372: to leading order diagram with initial quark $\Phi+q \rightarrow

373: Q+\bar{Q}+q$}. \label{fig:nloq}

374: \end{figure}

375: % -----------------------------------------------

376: 

377: Fig~(\ref{fig:nloq}) represents the lowest order diagrams

378: involving the quarks,  $\Phi + q \rightarrow Q +\bar{Q}+q$.  The

379: invariant matrix element for this process is given by

380: \begin{eqnarray}

381: M^\mu_{NLO-q} &=& g \overline{u}(k_2 ) \gamma_\nu T^a u(k_1 )

382: \frac{1}{(k_1- k_2 )^2 } \nonumber\\

383: &&\times -g \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}} \bigg[

384: (\vec{k_1}-\vec{k_2})\cdot \frac{

385: \partial \psi ( \vec{p})} {\partial \vec{k}}

386: g^{\nu 0} + (k_{10} -k_{20} ) \frac{\psi(\vec{p})}{\partial p_j }

387: g_j^\nu \bigg]  \nonumber\\

388: &&\times \overline{u}(p_1 )\frac{1+\gamma_0 }{2} \gamma_i g^{\mu

389: i} \frac{1-\gamma_0}{2} T^a v(p_2 ).

390: \end{eqnarray}

391: 

392: The averaged square in D-dimension is

393: \begin{eqnarray}

394: \overline{|M|}^2_{NLO-q} &=& \frac{2^{12}}{3}\pi g^4 m^2 m_\Phi

395: \bigg( \frac{ \epsilon_o }{m} \bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}

396: \frac{k_{10}-k_{20}-\epsilon_o}{(k_{10}-k_{20})^6}\nonumber\\

397: &&\times \bigg[ -\frac{1}{2} +\frac{k_{10}^2 +k_{20}^2 }{2k_1

398: \cdot k_2} +(D-4)\frac{(k_{10}-k_{20})^2}{4 k_1 \cdot k_2}\bigg].

399: \end{eqnarray}

400: 

401: It may be modified to the following covariant form,

402: \begin{eqnarray}

403: \overline{|M|}_{NLO-q}^2  &=& \frac{2^{11}}{3}\pi g^4 m^2

404: (2m_\Phi)^6 \bigg( \frac{ \epsilon_o }{m} \bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}

405: \frac{ \acute{s}+\acute{u}- 2 m_\Phi

406: \epsilon_o}{(\acute{s}+\acute{u})^6}

407: \nonumber\\

408: && \times \bigg[-\frac{1}{2} - \frac{\acute{s}^2 + \acute{u}^2

409: }{(2 m_\Phi )^2

410: \acute{t}}-(D-4)\frac{(\acute{s}+\acute{u})^2}{2\acute{t}} \bigg],

411: \label{inv}

412: \end{eqnarray}

413: where $\acute{s}\equiv 2q \cdot k_1$, $ \acute{u}\equiv -2q \cdot

414: k_2$, and $\acute{t}\equiv -2k_1 \cdot k_2$.

415: 

416: The parameterization of the three body phase space follows

417: ref.\cite{Beenakker}.   The initial and final momenta are set to

418: the following,

419: 

420: \begin{eqnarray}

421: q&=&(E_q, 0, ... , 0, 0,|\vec{p}| \sin\varphi,|\vec{p}|\cos\varphi-k_{10})\nonumber\\

422: k_1&=&(k_{10}, 0, ... , 0, 0, 0,k_{10}) \nonumber\\

423: p_1&=&(E_1, 0, ... , 0,

424: -k_{20}\sin\theta_1\sin\theta_2,-k_{20}\sin\theta_1\cos\theta_2,-k_{20}\cos\theta_1)\nonumber\\

425: p_2&=&(E_2, 0, ... , 0, 0, |\vec{p}|\sin\varphi,

426: |\vec{p}|\cos\varphi)\nonumber\\

427: k_2&=&(k_{20}, 0, ... ,

428: 0,k_{20}\sin\theta_1\sin\theta_2,k_{20}\sin\theta_1\cos\theta_2,k_{20}\cos\theta_1).

429: \end{eqnarray}

430: 

431: The following new invariant variables are introduced,

432: 

433: \begin{eqnarray}

434: t_1 &\equiv& (k_1-p_2)^2-m^2=-2k_1 \cdot p_2 \nonumber\\

435: u_1 &\equiv& (q-p_2)^2-m_\Phi^2-m^2=-2q \cdot p_2 \nonumber\\

436: s_4 &\equiv& (k_2+p_1)^2-m^2 =2k_2 \cdot p_1=s+t_1+u_1,

437: \end{eqnarray}

438: where $s=(q+k_1)^2$.

439: 

440: $E_q, k_{10}, E_1 ... $ may be expressed in terms of the invariant

441: variables $s(\acute{s}),t_1, u_1, s_4$.

442: 

443: \begin{eqnarray}

444: E_q&=&\frac{s+u_1+m_\Phi^2}{2\sqrt{s_4+m^2}} \nonumber\\

445: k_{10}&=&\frac{s+t_1-m_\Phi^2}{2\sqrt{s_4+m^2}} \nonumber\\

446: E_1&=&\frac{s_4+2m^2}{2\sqrt{s_4+m^2}}\nonumber\\

447: E_2&=&-\frac{t_1+u_1+2m^2}{2\sqrt{s_4+m^2}}\nonumber\\

448: k_{20}&=&\frac{s_4}{2\sqrt{s_4+m^2}}\ \nonumber\\

449: |\vec{p}|&=&\frac{\sqrt{(u_1+t_1)^2-4m^2

450: s}}{2\sqrt{s_4+m^2}}\nonumber\\

451: \cos \varphi&=&\frac{t_1 s_4

452: -s(u_1+2m^2)+(s_4-s+2m^2)m_\Phi^2}{(s+t_1-m_\Phi^2)\sqrt{(t_1+u_1)^2-4m^2

453: s }}. \label{kineticvariable}

454: \end{eqnarray}

455: 

456: Using these relations, Eq.~(\ref{inv}) are expressed by five

457: variables $s(\acute{s}),t_1, u_1, \theta_1, \theta_2$, because

458: 

459: \begin{eqnarray}

460: \acute{u}&=&(q-k_2)^2-m_\Phi^2=2k_{20}(-E_q+(|\vec{p}|\cos\varphi-k_{10})\cos\theta_1

461: +|\vec{p}|\sin\varphi\sin\theta_1

462: \cos\theta_2)\nonumber\\

463: \acute{t}&=&(k_1-k_2)^2=-2k_{10}k_{20}(1-\cos\theta_1).

464: \end{eqnarray}

465: 

466: The differential cross section for the three body decay is

467: 

468: \begin{eqnarray}

469: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma }{dt_1 du_1} &=&

470: \frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{(4\pi)^D}\frac{\mu^{-D+4}}{\Gamma(D-3)}\bigg(\frac{\acute{s}u_1

471: t_1-m_\Phi^2 t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}{\acute{s}^2 \mu^2 }

472: \bigg)^{\frac{D-4}{2}}

473: \frac{s_4^{D-3}}{(s_4+m^2)^{\frac{D}{2}-1}}\nonumber\\

474: && \times \int^\pi_0 d\theta_1 \sin^{D-3}\theta_1 \int^\pi_0

475: d\theta_2 \sin^{D-4}\theta_2 \overline{|M|}^2.

476: \end{eqnarray}

477: 

478: The derivation is given in Appendix A. When $\theta_1=0$,

479: ${\acute{t}}=0$ and the term $1/{\acute{t}}$ in Eq.~(\ref{inv})

480: gives collinear divergence. Defining $I^{(i,j)}$ as below,

481: 

482: \begin{eqnarray}

483: I^{(i,j)} \equiv \int^\pi_0 d\theta_1 \sin^{D-3}\theta_1

484: \int^\pi_0 d\theta_2 \sin^{D-4}\theta_2

485: \frac{1}{\acute{t}^i(\acute{u}+\acute{s})^j},

486: \end{eqnarray}

487: and expanding it with respect to $D-4$

488: 

489: \begin{eqnarray}

490: I^{(1,j)}=\frac{1}{D-4}I^{(1,j)}_{-1} +I^{(1,j)}_0 +O(D-4),

491: \end{eqnarray}

492: the differential cross section of $\Phi + q \rightarrow Q +

493: \bar{Q}+ q$ is regularized as below,

494: 

495: \begin{eqnarray}

496: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma_{NLO-q}}{dt_1 du_1} && =

497: \frac{2^8}{3}\frac{1}{(4\pi)^3}g^4 m^2 (2m_\Phi)^4

498: \bigg(\frac{\epsilon_o}{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}\frac{s_4}{s_4+m^2}\bigg[\nonumber\\

499: && \frac{1}{D-4}\bigg( -I^{(1,3)}_{-1}+2(\acute{s}+

500: m_\Phi\epsilon_o)I^{(1,4)}_{-1}-2\acute{s}(\acute{s}+2m_\Phi\epsilon_o)I^{(1,5)}_{-1}

501: +4\acute{s}^2m_\Phi\epsilon_o

502: I^{(1,6)}_{-1}\bigg)\nonumber\\

503: &&-2m_\Phi^2I^{(0,5)}+4m_\Phi^3\epsilon_o

504: I^{(0,6)}-I^{(1,3)}_{0}+2(\acute{s}+

505: m_\Phi\epsilon_o)I^{(1,4)}_{0}\nonumber\\

506: &&-2\acute{s}(\acute{s}+2m_\Phi\epsilon_o)I^{(1,5)}_{0}

507: +4\acute{s}^2m_\Phi\epsilon_o I^{(1,6)}_{0}\nonumber\\

508: &&+\bigg(\gamma_E+\ln \frac{s_4 \sqrt{ \acute{s}u_1 t_1-m_\Phi^2

509: t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4\pi\acute{s} \mu^2 \sqrt{s_4+m^2}}

510: \bigg)\nonumber\\

511: &&\ \ \ \ \times\bigg( -I^{(1,3)}_{-1}+2(\acute{s}+

512: m_\Phi\epsilon_o)I^{(1,4)}_{-1}

513: -2\acute{s}(\acute{s}+2m_\Phi\epsilon_o)I^{(1,5)}_{-1}+4\acute{s}^2m_\Phi\epsilon_o

514: I^{(1,6)}_{-1}\bigg) \nonumber\\

515: && -\frac{1}{2}I_{-1}^{(1,3)}+m_\Phi \epsilon_o I_{-1}^{(1,4)}\ \

516: \ \ \bigg].

517: \end{eqnarray}

518: 

519: From the list of integration in Appendix B,

520: 

521: \begin{eqnarray}

522: I^{(1,j)}_{-1}=\frac{2\pi}{a} \frac{1}{(A+B)^j}=\frac{2\pi}{a}

523: \frac{1}{(\acute{s}X)^j},

524: \end{eqnarray}

525: where $X = -(u_1+m_\Phi^2)/(\acute{s}+t_1)$, which is

526: $1-k_{20}/k_{10}$ in the quarkonium rest frame.  The definition of

527: $a$, $A$, and $B$ are given in Appendix B.  The terms proportional

528: to $1/(D-4)$ come from collinear divergence, and are eliminated by

529: mass factorization.

530: 

531: \subsection{Mass factorization}

532: 

533: % ------------ Figure 4. ------------------------

534: \begin{figure}

535: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{scale.eps}} \caption{Scale

536: dependence of parton distribution function.} \label{fig:scale}

537: \end{figure}

538: % -----------------------------------------------

539: 

540: Collinear divergence is eliminated by mass factorization, which

541: moves the divergent contribution to the parton distribution

542: function. When one parton is seen with finer scale, it is not seen

543: as one parton, but a sum of several collinear partons as shown in

544: Fig.~(\ref{fig:scale}). In other words, parton distribution

545: function has scale dependence, and

546: %, and

547: %partons with transverse momentum smaller than the defining scale

548: %should not be calculated perturbatively, as they are already

549: %included in the parton distribution functions.

550: the collinear parton with transverse momentum less than the scale

551: should be included in the parton distribution function.  Only the

552: parton with larger transverse momentum is included  in the

553: perturbative calculations. Therefore collinear partons should be

554: subtracted from the perturbative calculation. In the

555: $\overline{MS}$ scheme, mass factorization is defined as

556: 

557: \begin{eqnarray}

558: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \hat{\sigma}_{NLO-i}}{d t_1

559: du_1}=\acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma_{NLO-i}}{d t_1

560: du_1}-\frac{\alpha_s}{2 \pi} \int^1_0 \frac{dx}{x} P_{ji}(x)

561: \bigg( \frac{2}{D-4}+\gamma_E+\ln\frac{Q^2}{4\pi\mu^2} \bigg)

562: \hat{\acute{s}}^2 \frac{d^2 \hat{\sigma}_{LO-j}}{d\hat{t_1}du_1},

563: %\nonumber

564: \end{eqnarray}

565: where $\hat{\acute{s}}=x\acute{s}$, $\hat{t_1}= xt_1$. The

566: parenthesis means the integration of transverse momentum from zero

567: to momentum scale $Q$. $\sigma_{NLO-i}$ is the next leading order

568: cross section of quarkonium and parton $i$. $\hat{\sigma}_{NLO-i}$

569: is the reduced cross section after mass factorization, which is

570: finite. $\sigma_{LO-j}$ is the leading order cross section of

571: quarkonium and parton $j$, and

572: $\hat{\sigma}_{LO-j}=\sigma_{LO-j}$. $P_{ji}$ is the splitting

573: function of parton i to parton j. In $\Phi+q \rightarrow

574: Q+\bar{Q}+q$ process,

575: 

576: \begin{eqnarray}

577: P_{gq}(x)=\frac{N_c^2-1}{2N_c} \bigg[\frac{1+(1-x)^2}{x}\bigg]

578: \end{eqnarray}

579: is needed. The LO differential cross section is

580: 

581: \begin{eqnarray}

582: \hat{\acute{s}}^2 \frac{d^2

583: \hat{\sigma}_{LO-j}}{d\hat{t_1}du_1}&=&\frac{2^7}{3 N_c} g^2 m^2

584: (2m_\Phi)^4\bigg(\frac{\epsilon_o}{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}\frac{\acute{s}x-2m_\Phi

585: \epsilon_o}{(

586: \acute{s}x)^4}\delta(\acute{s}x+t_1x+u_1+m_\Phi^2)\nonumber\\

587: &&\times

588: \frac{D-2}{2}\frac{1}{\Gamma(D/2-1)}\bigg(\frac{\acute{s}u_1

589: t_1-m_\Phi^2 t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}{4\pi \mu^2

590: \acute{s}^2}\bigg)^{\frac{D-4}{2}}.

591: \end{eqnarray}

592: The LO differential cross section can be obtained from

593: substituting Eq.~(\ref{lo}) into Eq.~(\ref{2-body}) in Appendix A.

594: 

595: After mass factorization, the reduced differential cross section

596: is

597: 

598: \begin{eqnarray}

599: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \hat{\sigma}_{NLO-q}}{d t_1

600: du_1}&=&\frac{2^7}{3}\frac{1}{(4\pi)^2}g^4 m^2

601: (2m_\Phi)^4\bigg(\frac{\epsilon_o}{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}\frac{1}{\acute{s}+t_1}\nonumber\\

602: &\times& \bigg[

603: \frac{m_\Phi^2(\acute{s}+t_1)}{\pi}\frac{s_4}{s_4+m^2}(-I^{(0,5)}+2m_\Phi\epsilon_o

604: I^{(0,6)})\nonumber\\

605: &&+\frac{1}{(\acute{s}X)^3}\bigg(\ln\frac{s_4^2}{Q^2(s_4+m^2)}+I^{(1,3)*}_0

606: \bigg)\nonumber\\

607: &&-\frac{2(\acute{s}+m_\Phi \epsilon_o)

608: }{(\acute{s}X)^4}\bigg(\ln\frac{s_4^2}{Q^2(s_4+m^2)}+I^{(1,4)*}_0

609: \bigg)+\frac{2\acute{s}}{(\acute{s}X)^4}\nonumber\\

610: &&+\frac{2\acute{s}(\acute{s}+2m_\Phi\epsilon_o)}{(\acute{s}X)^5}

611: \bigg(\ln\frac{s_4^2}{Q^2(s_4+m^2)}+I^{(1,5)*}_0-1\bigg)\nonumber\\

612: &&-\frac{4m_\Phi \epsilon_o \acute{s}^2

613: }{(\acute{s}X)^6}\bigg(\ln\frac{s_4^2}{Q^2(s_4+m^2)}+I^{(1,6)*}_0-1

614: \bigg)\ \ \ \ \ \bigg]\label{nlo-q},

615: \end{eqnarray}

616: where $I^{(1,j)*}_0 \equiv a(A+B)^j I^{(1,j)}_0/{\pi} =

617: a(\acute{s}X)^j I^{(1,j)}_0/{\pi}$.

618: 

619: 

620: One should also note that the cross sections to NLO in

621: Eq.~(\ref{nlo-q}) and to LO in Eq.~(\ref{locs}) have the same

622: large $N_c$ scaling, as the coupling constant $g$ scales as

623: $1/\sqrt{N_c}$.

624: 

625: The threshold of differential cross section in (\ref{nlo-q}) is

626: $\acute{s}=2m_\Phi \epsilon_o$. This comes from the quarkonium

627: wavefunction (\ref{wavef}). However, the physical threshold is

628: $\acute{s}=2m_\Phi \epsilon_o+\epsilon_o^2$. The term

629: $\epsilon_o^2$ was ignored because $g$ is of $O(mg^4)$. We

630: circumvent this problem by substituting

631: $\epsilon_o+\epsilon_o^2/2m_\Phi$ for $\epsilon_o$ in the

632: differential cross section.

633: 

634: \subsection{Dalitz plot}

635: 

636: % ------------------------ Figure 5. ---------------------------

637: \begin{figure}

638: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{dalitz1.eps}}\caption{Dalitz

639: plot for $\Phi+q\rightarrow Q+\bar{Q}+q$.} \label{fig:Dalitz1}

640: \end{figure}

641: % --------------------------------------------------------------

642: 

643: 

644: Fig.~(\ref{fig:Dalitz1}) is the Dalitz plot, which is drawn under

645: the following two conditions.

646: 

647: \begin{eqnarray}

648: s_4&=&\acute{s}+u_1+t_1+m_\Phi^2\geq 0 \\

649: |\cos\chi|^2&=&\bigg|\frac{-2u_1

650: s+(s+m_\Phi^2)(t_1+u_1)}{\acute{s}\sqrt{(t_1+u_1)^2-4sm^2}}\bigg|^2\leq

651: 1,

652: \end{eqnarray}

653: here $\chi$ is the angle between $\vec{q}$ and $\vec{p}_2$, or

654: $\vec{q}$ and $\vec{p}_1+\vec{k}_2$ in CM frame Eq.~(\ref{angle}).

655: The elementary total cross section is obtained by numerically

656: integrating Eq.~(\ref{nlo-q}) over the Dalitz plot.  Furthermore,

657: the hadronic cross section is obtained by folding it with the

658: quark distribution function.

659: 

660: 

661: \section{Hard part of the $\Phi + g \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ g$ process}

662: 

663: \subsection{Soft and/or collinear divergent elementary cross

664: section}

665: 

666: Fig.~(\ref{fig:nlog}) represent the diagrams for the process $\Phi

667: + g \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ g$.  Among them, diagrams (13), (14),

668: and (15) are ignored because they are higher order in $g$ compared

669: to the rest of the diagrams, in the present counting scheme, where

670: the momentum of the internal gluon, which binds heavy quark and

671: antiquark, is of $O(mg^2)$ (from Eq.~(\ref{hardg})), and that of

672: the external gluon is of $O(mg^4)$ (from Eq.~(\ref{gorder})).

673: Details are given in Appendix D.

674: 

675: The invariant amplitude in quarkonium rest frame is

676: 

677: % ---------------------- Figure 6. ----------------------------

678: \begin{figure}

679: \centerline{

680: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{nlo2a.eps}\hfill

681: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{nlo2b.eps}}\caption{Next to leading

682: order diagram with initial gluon $\Phi+g \rightarrow

683: Q+\bar{Q}+g$.} \label{fig:nlog}

684: \end{figure}

685: % ---------------------------------------------------------------

686: 

687: 

688: 

689: 

690: \begin{eqnarray}

691: M^{\mu \nu \lambda (a,b) }_{NLO-g} &=& \bigg[ \bigg(\frac{

692: \partial \psi (p )}{\partial \vec{p}} \cdot \vec{k_1} \bigg)

693: \bigg(-g^\lambda_0 g^\nu_0 \frac{1}{k_{20}} + \frac{1}{k_1 \cdot

694: k_2 } (g^\lambda_0 k^\nu_2

695: +g^\nu_0 k^\lambda_1 - g^{\nu \lambda } k_{20}) \bigg) \nonumber\\

696: &&+\bigg(\frac{ \partial \psi (p )}{\partial \vec{p}} \cdot

697: \vec{k_2} \bigg) \bigg(g^\lambda_0 g^\nu_0 \frac{1}{k_{10}} -

698: \frac{1}{k_1 \cdot k_2 } (g^\lambda_0 k^\nu_2 +g^\nu_0 k^\lambda_1

699: - g^{\nu \lambda } k_{10}) \bigg)

700: \nonumber\\

701: &&+(k_{10 } -k_{20 }) \frac{\psi(p) }{\partial p_{j}}

702: \bigg(-g^\lambda_j g^\nu_0 \frac{1}{k_{10 }} -g^\lambda_0 g^\nu_j

703: \frac{1}{k_{20}} +\frac{1}{k_1 \cdot k_2 } (g^\nu_j k^\lambda_1

704: +g^\lambda_j k^\nu_2 )\bigg) \bigg] \nonumber\\

705: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \times g^2 \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c }}

706: \overline{u}(p_1 )\frac{1+\gamma_0 }{2} \gamma_i g^{\mu

707: i}\frac{1-\gamma_0}{2}\ [T^a ,T^b ]\ v(p_2 ). \label{amp-g}

708: \end{eqnarray}

709: 

710: The detailed derivation of this result is given in Appendix C.  It

711: was checked that the following current conservation conditions are

712: satisfied.

713: \begin{eqnarray}

714: q_\mu M^{\mu \nu \lambda}_{NLO-g} = k_{1 \nu} M^{\mu \nu

715: \lambda}_{NLO-g} = k_{2 \lambda} M^{\mu \nu

716: \lambda}_{NLO-g}=0.\nonumber

717: \end{eqnarray}

718: 

719: The averaged squared amplitude is

720: 

721: \begin{eqnarray}

722: \overline{|M|}_{NLO-g}^2  =\frac{2^{11}}{3} \pi g^4 m^2 (2 m_\Phi

723: )^6 \bigg(\frac{\epsilon_o }{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}} \bigg(

724: \frac{1}{(\acute{s}+\acute{u})^5 } -\frac{2m_\Phi

725: \epsilon_o}{(\acute{s}+\acute{u})^6 } \bigg) \bigg[ \frac{(2m_\Phi

726: )^2 }{2}

727: \frac{\acute{t}}{\acute{s} \acute{u}}\nonumber\\

728: -\frac{D-2}{2}\bigg( \frac{2 \acute{s}}{\acute{u}}

729: +\frac{2\acute{u}}{\acute{s}}+\frac{\acute{u}^2}{\acute{s}^2}

730: +\frac{\acute{s}^2}{\acute{u}^2}\bigg)-D\nonumber\\

731: +\frac{D-2}{2m^2_\Phi \acute{t}} \bigg( \frac{(\acute{s}^2

732: +\acute{u}^2 )^2}{\acute{s} \acute{u}} +2\acute{s}^2 +2\acute{u}^2

733: +\acute{s}\acute{u} \bigg) \bigg]. \label{ave}

734: \end{eqnarray}

735: 

736: 

737: The first line is of order $\acute{t}$, the second line  of order

738: $\acute{t}^0$, and the third line of order $\acute{t}^{-1}$.

739: 

740: Differential cross section from the first line is

741: 

742: \begin{eqnarray}

743: \frac{2^{7}}{3}\frac{1}{(4 \pi)^3} g^4 m^2 (2 m_\Phi )^8

744: (\frac{\epsilon_o

745: }{m})^{\frac{5}{2}}\frac{s_4}{s_4+m^2}\bigg[\bigg(1-\frac{2m_\Phi

746: \epsilon_o

747: }{\acute{s}}\bigg)\bigg(\frac{J^{(-1,1)}}{\acute{s}^6}-\frac{I^{(-1,1)}}{\acute{s}^6}

748: \nonumber\\-\frac{I^{(-1,2)}}{\acute{s}^5}-\frac{I^{(-1,3)}}{\acute{s}^4}

749: -\frac{I^{(-1,4)}}{\acute{s}^3}

750: -\frac{I^{(-1,5)}}{\acute{s}^2}\bigg)+\frac{2m_\Phi\epsilon_o

751: }{\acute{s}^2}I^{(-1,6)}  \bigg],\label{hard1}

752: \end{eqnarray}

753: where $J^{(i,j)}$ is defined as follows,

754: 

755: \begin{eqnarray}

756: J^{(i,j)}&\equiv& \int^\pi_0 d\theta_1 \sin^{D-3}\theta_1

757: \int^\pi_0 d\theta_2

758: \sin^{D-4}\theta_2\frac{1}{(\acute{t})^i(\acute{u})^j}\nonumber\\

759: &=&\int^\pi_0 d\theta_1  \int^\pi_0 d\theta_2

760: \frac{\sin^{D-3}\theta_1 \sin^{D-4}\theta_2

761: }{(a-a\cos\theta_1)^i(\acute{A}+\acute{B}\cos\theta_1+\acute{C}\sin\theta_1

762: \cos\theta_2)^j},\nonumber

763: \end{eqnarray}

764: and, $\acute{A}=-2E_q k_{20}$, $\acute{B}=B$, and $\acute{C}=C$.

765: The products of invariant variables are decomposed as below.

766: 

767: \begin{eqnarray}

768: \frac{1}{(\acute{s}+\acute{u})^5

769: \acute{u}}&=&\frac{1}{\acute{u}\acute{s}^5

770: }-\frac{1}{(\acute{s}+\acute{u})

771: \acute{s}^5}-\frac{1}{(\acute{s}+\acute{u})^2

772: \acute{s}^4}-\frac{1}{(\acute{s}+\acute{u})^3

773: \acute{s}^3}-\frac{1}{(\acute{s}+\acute{u})^4

774: \acute{s}^2}\nonumber\\

775: &&-\frac{1}{(\acute{s}+\acute{u})^5 \acute{s}}

776: \end{eqnarray}

777: 

778: The first line has no divergent term.

779: 

780: Differential cross section from the second line is

781: 

782: \begin{eqnarray}

783: &&\frac{2^{8}}{3}\frac{1}{(4\pi)^3} g^4 m^2 (2 m_\Phi )^6

784: \bigg(\frac{\epsilon_o }{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}\frac{s_4}{s_4+m^2}

785: \bigg[J^{(0,1)}\bigg(\frac{3\acute{s}-8m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^5}\bigg)\nonumber\\

786: &&+ \frac{D-2}{2\Gamma(D-3)}\bigg(\frac{s_4 \sqrt{\acute{s}u_1

787: t_1-m_\Phi^2 t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4\pi \acute{s}\mu^2

788: \sqrt{s_4+m^2}}

789: \bigg)^{D-4}J^{(0,2)}\bigg(\frac{-\acute{s}+2m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^4}\bigg)\nonumber\\

790: &&+

791: I^{(0,1)}\bigg(\frac{-3\acute{s}+8m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^5}\bigg)+

792: I^{(0,2)}\bigg(\frac{-2\acute{s}+6m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^4}\bigg)\nonumber\\&&+

793: I^{(0,3)}\bigg(\frac{-2\acute{s}+4m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^3}\bigg)+

794: \frac{4m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^2}I^{(0,4)}-2I^{(0,5)} +4m_\Phi

795: \epsilon_o I^{(0,6)} \bigg].\label{hard2}

796: \end{eqnarray}

797: $J^{(0,2)}$ is the soft divergent term, because it is proportional

798: to $1/\acute{u}^2$, which is $1/k_{20}^2$ in quarkonium rest

799: frame.

800: 

801: Differential cross section from the third line is

802: 

803: \begin{eqnarray}

804: &&\frac{2^{10}}{3}\frac{1}{(4\pi)^3} g^4 m^2 (2 m_\Phi )^4

805: \bigg(\frac{\epsilon_o }{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}

806: \frac{s_4}{s_4+m^2}\nonumber\\

807: &&\times \bigg[

808: \bigg(\frac{1}{D-4}+\gamma_E+\ln\frac{s_4\sqrt{\acute{s}u_1 t_1

809: -m_\Phi^2 t_1^2

810: -m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4\pi\mu^2\acute{s}\sqrt{s_4+m^2}}+\frac{1}{2}\ \bigg)\nonumber\\

811: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \times\frac{2 \pi}{a} \bigg(

812: \frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^3}\frac{1}{\acute{s}(x-1)}

813: -\frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^3}\frac{1}{\acute{s}x}

814: +\frac{2m_\Phi \epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^2} \frac{1}{(\acute{s}x)^2}\nonumber\\

815: &&-2\frac{1}{(\acute{s}x)^3} +(\acute{s}+4m_\Phi \epsilon_o

816: )\frac{1}{(\acute{s}x)^4}

817: -\acute{s}(\acute{s}+2m_\Phi\epsilon_o)\frac{1}{(\acute{s}x)^5}+2m_\Phi\epsilon_o

818: \acute{s}^2 \frac{1}{(\acute{s}x)^6} \bigg) \nonumber\\

819: &&\ \ \ \ \ \

820: +\frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^3}J^{(1,1)}_0

821: -\frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^3}I^{(1,1)}_0

822: +\frac{2m_\Phi \epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^2} I^{(1,2)}_0 -2I^{(1,3)}_0\nonumber\\

823: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +(\acute{s}+4m_\Phi \epsilon_o )I^{(1,4)}_0

824: -\acute{s}(\acute{s}+2m_\Phi\epsilon_o)I^{(1,5)}_0

825: +2m_\Phi\epsilon_o\acute{s}^2 I^{(1,6)}_0 \bigg],\label{hard3}

826: \end{eqnarray}

827: where $J^{(1,j)}$ is expanded with respect to $D-4$

828: 

829: \begin{eqnarray}

830: J^{(1,j)} = \frac{1}{D-4}J^{(1,j)}_{-1} +J^{(1,j)}_0 +O(D-4),

831: \end{eqnarray}

832: and,

833: 

834: \begin{eqnarray}

835: J^{(1,j)}_{-1}&=&\frac{2\pi}{a}

836: \frac{1}{(\acute{A}+\acute{B})^j}=\frac{2\pi}{a}

837: \frac{1}{(\acute{s}(X-1))^j}.

838: \end{eqnarray}

839: 

840: $1/(D-4)$ term of Eq.~(\ref{hard3}) is collinear divergent.

841: Additionally $1/{a(1-X)}$ term gives soft divergence, because both

842: $a$ and $1-X$ are proportional to $k_{20}$. Thus this term gives

843: soft-collinear divergence.

844: 

845: 

846: 

847: \subsection{Mass factorization in hard gluon emitted region}

848: 

849: % ----------------------- Figure 7. ------------------------

850: \begin{figure}

851: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{dalitz2.eps}}

852: \caption{Dalitz plot for $\Phi+g\rightarrow Q+\bar{Q}+g$.}

853: \label{fig:Dalitz2}

854: \end{figure}

855: % ----------------------------------------------------------

856: 

857: The Dalitz plot for $\Phi+g \rightarrow Q +\bar{Q}+ g$ is the same

858: as $\Phi+q \rightarrow Q +\bar{Q}+q$. But it is separated as soft

859: gluon emitting region and hard gluon emitting region as shown in

860: Fig.~(\ref{fig:Dalitz2}). The boundary line is $s_4=\Delta$ which

861: is an arbitrarily small value. That is, if $s_4$ is smaller

862: (larger) than $\Delta$, it corresponds to the region where soft

863: (hard) gluon are emitted.   Because all infrared divergences exit

864: in soft gluon emitting region, hard gluon region has only

865: collinear divergence. This collinear divergence is eliminated by

866: mass factorization.

867: 

868: \begin{eqnarray}

869: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \hat{\sigma}_{NLO-g}}{d t_1 du_1}&=&s^2

870: \frac{d^2 \sigma_{NLO-g}}{d t_1

871: du_1}\nonumber\\

872: &-&\frac{\alpha_s}{2 \pi} \int^1_0 \frac{dx}{x} P_{gg}(x) \bigg(

873: \frac{2}{D-4}+\gamma_E+\ln\frac{Q^2}{4\pi\mu^2} \bigg)

874: \hat{\acute{s}}^2 \frac{d^2

875: \hat{\sigma}_{LO}}{d\hat{t_1}du_1},\label{gmf}

876: \end{eqnarray}

877: where $P_{gg}(x)$ is a gluon to gluon splitting function, and may

878: be separated into hard part and soft part, which are proportional

879: to $\theta$ function and $\delta$ function respectively

880: \cite{Beenakker}.

881: 

882: \begin{eqnarray}

883: P_{gg}(x)&=& N_c  \theta(1-x-\delta) \bigg(

884: \frac{2}{1-x}+\frac{2}{x}-4+2x-2x^2 \bigg)\nonumber\\

885: &&\ \ \ \ +\ N_c \delta(1-x)\bigg(2\ln\delta+\frac{11}{6}-\frac{N_f}{3N_c}\bigg) \nonumber\\

886: &\equiv& \theta(1-x-\delta)P_{gg}^H

887: +\delta(1-x)P_{gg}^S.\label{mfs}

888: \end{eqnarray}

889: 

890: We ignore the factor proportional to $N_f$(the number of light

891: quark flavor) in the soft part, because it is suppressed in the

892: large $N_c$ limit. The boundary of hard and soft mass

893: factorization is $x=1-\delta$. $\delta$ is related to $\Delta$ by

894: $\delta=\Delta/(\acute{s}+t_1)$, because $x\leq 1-\delta$ means

895: $s_4 \geq \delta ( \acute{s}+t_1)$. After hard part mass

896: factorization, Eq.~({\ref{hard3}) becomes

897: 

898: \begin{eqnarray}

899: &&\frac{2^{9}}{3}\frac{1}{(4\pi)^2} g^4 m^2 (2 m_\Phi )^4

900: \bigg(\frac{\epsilon_o

901: }{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}\frac{1}{\acute{s}+t_1}\nonumber\\

902: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \times \bigg[\

903: \frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^3}\frac{1}{(1-X)\acute{s}}\bigg(\ln

904: \frac{s_4^2}{Q^2 (s_4+m^2)}+J^{(1,1)*}_0 \bigg) \nonumber\\

905: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

906: +\frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi\epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^3}\frac{1}{\acute{s}X}\bigg(\ln

907: \frac{s_4^2}{Q^2 (s_4+m^2)}+I^{(1,1)*}_0 \bigg) \nonumber\\

908: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ -\frac{2m_\Phi \epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^2}

909: \frac{1}{(\acute{s}X)^2}\bigg(\ln

910: \frac{s_4^2}{Q^2 (s_4+m^2)}+I^{(1,2)*}_0 \bigg) \nonumber\\

911: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

912: +2\frac{1}{(\acute{s}X)^3}\bigg(\ln\frac{s_4^2}{Q^2 (s_4+m^2)}+I^{(1,3)*}_0 \bigg) \nonumber\\

913: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ -(\acute{s}+4m_\Phi \epsilon_o

914: )\frac{1}{(\acute{s}X)^4}\bigg(\ln

915: \frac{s_4^2}{Q^2 (s_4+m^2)}+I^{(1,4)*}_0 \bigg) \nonumber\\

916: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

917: +\acute{s}(\acute{s}+2m_\Phi\epsilon_o)\frac{1}{(\acute{s}X)^5}\bigg(\ln

918: \frac{s_4^2}{Q^2 (s_4+m^2)}+I^{(1,5)*}_0 \bigg)

919: \nonumber\\

920: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ -2m_\Phi\epsilon_o \acute{s}^2

921: \frac{1}{(\acute{s}X)^6}\bigg(\ln \frac{s_4^2}{Q^2

922: (s_4+m^2)}+I^{(1,6)*}_0 \bigg)\ \bigg],\label{hardpart}

923: \end{eqnarray}

924: where $J^{(1,1)*}_0 \equiv a(\acute{A}+\acute{B})J^{(1,i)}_0/\pi =

925: a(X-1)J^{(1,i)}_0/\pi$. After mass factorization, collinear

926: divergence $1/(D-4)$ of Eq.~(\ref{hard3}) is removed.

927: 

928: 

929: 

930: 

931: 

932: \section{Soft part of the $\Phi + g \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ g$ process}

933: 

934: \subsection{Differential cross section for soft gluon emitted part}

935: 

936: In hard gluon emitted region, differential cross section is the

937: sum of Eq.~(\ref{hard1}), Eq.~(\ref{hard2}), and

938: Eq.~(\ref{hardpart}). But in soft gluon emitted region,

939: $\acute{t}\rightarrow 0$, $\acute{u}\rightarrow 0$, and

940: $s_4\rightarrow 0$. In this limit, only soft and soft-collinear

941: divergent terms contribute and the differential cross section

942: becomes

943: 

944: \begin{eqnarray}

945: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma^S}{dt_1 du_1}&\equiv&

946: \delta(s+t_1+u_1) \int^\Delta_0 ds_4 \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2

947: \sigma}{dt_1

948: du_1}\nonumber\\

949: &=&\frac{2^9}{3}\frac{1}{(4\pi)^2}g^4 m^2 (2m_\Phi)^4

950: \bigg(\frac{\epsilon_o}{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}\frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi

951: \epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^4} \delta(s+t_1+u_1)\nonumber\\

952: &&\times \bigg[ -\frac{1}{D-4}-\gamma_E -\ln

953: \frac{\Delta\sqrt{\acute{s}u_1 t_1-m_\Phi^2

954: t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4 \pi \mu^2 m\acute{s}}-\frac{1}{2}

955: \nonumber\\

956: && +\frac{2}{(D-4)^2}+\frac{2}{D-4}\bigg(\gamma_E

957: +\ln\frac{\Delta\sqrt{\acute{s}u_1 t_1-m_\Phi^2

958: t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4 \pi \mu^2 m_\Phi

959: (\acute{s}+t_1)}+\frac{1}{2}\

960: \bigg)\nonumber\\

961: &&\ \ \ \ \ +\ln^2 \frac{\Delta\sqrt{\acute{s}u_1 t_1-m_\Phi^2

962: t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4 \pi m\mu^2 \acute{s}} \nonumber\\

963: &&\ \ \ \ \  +2\ln \frac{\Delta\sqrt{\acute{s}u_1 t_1-m_\Phi^2

964: t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4 \pi m\mu^2

965: \acute{s}}\cdot\ln\frac{m\acute{s}}{(\acute{s}+t_1)m_\Phi}\nonumber\\

966: &&\ \ \ \ \  +(2\gamma_E+1) \ln\frac{\Delta\sqrt{\acute{s}u_1

967: t_1-m_\Phi^2 t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4 \pi \mu^2 m_\Phi

968: (\acute{s}+t_1)}\nonumber\\

969: &&\ \ \ \ \  +\gamma_E^2+\gamma_E

970: -\frac{\pi^2}{6}+\frac{\Theta}{2}\ \bigg], \label{soft-g}

971: \end{eqnarray}

972: where

973: 

974: \begin{eqnarray}

975: \Theta &\equiv& 2 Li_2

976: \bigg(-\frac{\acute{B}+\sqrt{\acute{B}^2+\acute{C}^2}}{\acute{A}-\sqrt{\acute{B}^2+\acute{C}^2}}

977: \bigg) -2 Li_2 \bigg(

978: \frac{\acute{B}-\sqrt{\acute{B}^2+\acute{C}^2}}{\acute{A}+\acute{B}}\bigg)\nonumber\\

979: &&+\ln^2

980: \frac{\acute{A}-\sqrt{\acute{B}^2+\acute{C}^2}}{\acute{A}+\acute{B}}-\frac{1}{2}\ln^2

981: \frac{\acute{A}+\sqrt{\acute{B}^2+\acute{C}^2}}{\acute{A}-\sqrt{\acute{B}^2+\acute{C}^2}},

982: \end{eqnarray}

983: and we used the limiting values

984: $\acute{A}^2-\acute{B}^2-\acute{C}^2 \rightarrow s_4^2

985: m_\Phi^2/m^2$, $a(\acute{A}+\acute{B})\rightarrow \acute{s}

986: s_4^2/(2m^2)$, and

987: $(\acute{A}+\acute{B})^2/(\acute{A}^2-\acute{B}^2-\acute{C}^2)\rightarrow

988: [\acute{s} m/m_\Phi (\acute{s}+t_1)]^2$. For the definition of

989: soft gluon differential cross section, refer to \cite{Beenakker}.

990: In Eq.~(\ref{soft-g}), the first line in the square bracket comes

991: from soft divergence, and the others come from soft-collinear

992: divergence.  These soft divergences may be eliminated by adding

993: the mixed term of Born diagram and its one loop corrections.

994: 

995: 

996: 

997: \subsection{Effective four point vertex}

998: 

999: Before considering the one loop correction, it is helpful to

1000: introduce the effective four point vertex. This vertex is attached

1001: to a quarkonium, a gluon, a heavy quark, and a heavy antiquark

1002: line and defined as

1003: 

1004: \begin{eqnarray}

1005: M_{\mu \nu}^{(a)}(k)&\equiv& -g \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}} \bigg[\

1006: \vec{k}\cdot \frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial \vec{p}} g^{\nu

1007: 0}+\bigg(\frac{|\vec{p}|^2}{m}+\epsilon_0 \bigg) \frac{\partial

1008: \psi(p)}{\partial p_j}g^{\nu j}\ \bigg]\nonumber\\

1009: &&\times \frac{1+\gamma_0}{2}\gamma^i g_i^\mu

1010: \frac{1-\gamma_0}{2}T^a.

1011: \end{eqnarray}

1012: 

1013: It is just the leading order invariant amplitude given in

1014: Eq.~(\ref{lo}), except that $k_{10}$ is substituted by

1015: $|\vec{p}|^2/m+\epsilon_0$. Although

1016: $|\vec{p}|^2/m+\epsilon_0=k_{10}$ to LO, it is not so in general.

1017: Using this effective vertex, the matrix element for the process

1018: $\Phi + g \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q}+ g$ represented in

1019: Fig.~(\ref{fig:nlog}) can be reproduced by five diagrams shown in

1020: Fig.~(\ref{fig:newvertex}). Specifically,

1021: 

1022: % ----------------------- Figure 8. ------------------------

1023: \begin{figure}

1024: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=12cm]{newvertex.eps}}

1025: \caption{Diagrams for $\Phi+g \rightarrow Q+\bar{Q}+g$ using

1026: four-point vertex. (a), (b), and (c) are diagrams for $M_1$,

1027: $M_2$, and $M_3$ respectively.} \label{fig:newvertex}

1028: \end{figure}

1029: % ----------------------------------------------------------

1030: 

1031: 

1032: \begin{eqnarray}

1033: M_1^{\mu \nu \lambda (a,b)} &=& -g \bar{u}(p_1)\bigg[\

1034: \gamma^\lambda T^b

1035: \Delta (p_1+k_2)M^{\mu \nu (a)}(k_1) \nonumber\\

1036: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +M^{\mu \nu (a)}(k_1)\Delta(-p_2-k_2) \gamma^\lambda

1037: T^b \ \bigg]v(p_2) \nonumber\\

1038: &=& g \frac{g^{\lambda 0}}{k_{20}+i\varepsilon} \bar{u}(p_1)

1039: M^{\mu \nu}(k_1)[T^a,T^b]v(p_2),

1040: \end{eqnarray}

1041: where $M^{\mu \nu (a)}(k_1)=M^{\mu \nu }(k_1)T^a$.

1042: 

1043: $M_2$ is the same as $M_1$ with $(k_1, a, \nu)$ and $(-k_2, b,

1044: \lambda)$ exchanged.

1045: 

1046: \begin{eqnarray}

1047: M_2^{\mu \nu \lambda (a,b)}=g \frac{g^{\nu

1048: 0}}{-k_{10}+i\varepsilon} \bar{u}(p_1) M^{\mu

1049: \lambda}(-k_2)[T^b,T^a]v(p_2).

1050: \end{eqnarray}

1051: 

1052: $M_3$ is a diagram which emits a gluon from the external gluon

1053: leg.

1054: 

1055: \begin{eqnarray}

1056: M_3^{\mu \nu \lambda (a,b)}&=&-i g f^{abc} \bar{u}(p_1)M^{\mu

1057: \sigma

1058: (c)}(k_1-k_2)v(p_2)\frac{1}{(k_1-k_2)^2+i\varepsilon}\nonumber\\

1059: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \times [(k_1+k_2)_\sigma g^{\nu

1060: \lambda}+(k_1-2k_2)^\nu g^\lambda_\sigma +(-2k_1+k_2)^\lambda

1061: g^\nu_\sigma ]

1062: \end{eqnarray}

1063: 

1064: The sum of all diagrams is exactly the same as Eq.~(\ref{amp-g}).

1065: 

1066: \begin{eqnarray}

1067: M_1^{\mu \nu \lambda (a,b)

1068: }+M_2^{\mu \nu \lambda (a,b)}+M_3^{\mu \nu \lambda (a,b)}=M^{\mu \nu \lambda (a,b) }_{NLO-g}

1069: \end{eqnarray}

1070: 

1071: Introduction of this effective vertex has some benefits.  It makes the calculation

1072: much easier and one does not need to consider the inner structure

1073: of the four point vertex, which is very complicated when

1074: considering the one loop corrections.

1075: 

1076: 

1077: 

1078: 

1079: \subsection{One loop correction}

1080: 

1081: % ----------------------- Figure 9. ------------------------

1082: \begin{figure}

1083: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=12cm]{bv.eps}} \caption{One

1084: loop corrections.}\label{fig:bv}

1085: \end{figure}

1086: % ----------------------------------------------------------

1087: 

1088: Several comments are in order before considering the one loop

1089: correction.  In dimensional regularization,

1090: 

1091: \begin{eqnarray}

1092: \frac{\Gamma(D/2)}{\pi^{D/2}i}\int \frac{d^D

1093: q}{(-q)^\alpha}=\frac{\Lambda^{D_I-2\alpha}}{D_I/2-\alpha}

1094: -\frac{\Lambda^{D_U-2\alpha}}{D_U/2-\alpha}.

1095: \end{eqnarray}

1096: $D_I$ is the dimension which regularizes the infrared divergence,

1097: and $D_U$ the ultraviolet divergence.  $\Lambda$ is the cutoff of

1098: the momentum integral.  Generally this integration is zero. But we

1099: have left over $\alpha=2$ case, because it shows clearly the

1100: cancellation of infrared divergence and ultraviolet divergence

1101: separately.  Second, in contrast to the order of typical loop

1102: momentum  appearing in Eq.~(\ref{hardg}), which is  of $O(mg^2)$,

1103: we set the order of gluon loop momentum in the one loop

1104: corrections to be of $O(mg^4)$.   This is to explicitly separate

1105: the soft part that cancels the soft divergence coming from emitted

1106: gluons of $O(mg^4)$. Keeping these comments, all divergences may

1107: be eliminated systematically.

1108: 

1109: Diagram $<1>$ of Fig.~(\ref{fig:bv}) is the one loop correction of

1110: heavy quark and antiquark external lines. The product of on-shell

1111: heavy quark propagator and its self energy is

1112: 

1113: \begin{eqnarray}

1114: i\Delta(p_1)\Sigma(p_1)&=&-ig^2\int\frac{d^D

1115: k}{(2\pi)^D}\gamma^\mu \Delta(p_1+k)\gamma_\mu \Delta(p_1)T^a T^a

1116: \frac{1}{k^2+i\varepsilon}\nonumber\\

1117: &=&-ig^2 T^a T^a \frac{1+\gamma_0}{2}\int\frac{d^D k}{(2\pi)^D}

1118: \frac{4m^2}{(p_1+k)^2-m^2+i\varepsilon}\frac{1}{p_1^2-m^2+i\varepsilon}\frac{1}{k^2+i\varepsilon}.

1119: \end{eqnarray}

1120: 

1121: We assumed that $p_1$ is slightly off-shell, and used the  heavy

1122: quark propagators as in Eq~(\ref{qpropa}).  Moreover,

1123: $\Delta(p_1+k)$ is replaced by $[\Delta(p_1+k)+\Delta(p_1-k)]/2$.

1124: Then one has,

1125: 

1126: \begin{eqnarray}

1127: i\Delta(p_1)\Sigma(p_1)&=& ig^2 T^a T^a

1128: \frac{1+\gamma_0}{2}\int\frac{d^D

1129: k}{(2\pi)^D}\frac{1}{(k_0+i\varepsilon)(k_0-i\varepsilon)(k^2+i\varepsilon)}\nonumber\\

1130: &=&g^2 \frac{1}{(4\pi)^{\frac{D-1}{2}}\Gamma(\frac{D-1}{2})}

1131: \bigg[\frac{\Lambda^{D-4}}{D_I-4}-\frac{\Lambda^{D-4}}{D_U-4}\bigg]

1132: T^a T^a \frac{1+\gamma_0}{2}.  \label{self1}

1133: \end{eqnarray}

1134: 

1135: In the $k_0$ contour integration, the residue at

1136: $k_0=i\varepsilon$ or at $k_0=-i\varepsilon$ makes the one loop

1137: correction pure imaginary. Therefore, in these cases, the mixed

1138: term of LO and its one loop correction vanishes. The self energy

1139: of the antiquark is the same except that $(1+\gamma_0)/2$ is

1140: replaced by $(1-\gamma_0)/2$. However it has the same contribution

1141: to the differential cross section, because spinor wavefunction

1142: $u(p_1)$ is proportional to $(1+\gamma_0)/2$, while $v(p_2)$ is to

1143: $(1-\gamma_0)/2$ in the heavy quark limit.

1144: 

1145: As can be seen from Eq.~(\ref{self1}), the renormalization

1146: constant of the heavy quark mass has no divergence. Only the

1147: renormalization constants of the heavy quark and antiquark fields

1148: have both ultraviolet and infrared divergences. The differential

1149: cross section from the mixed term of Born diagram and the same

1150: diagram but with the self energy insertion to the  external heavy

1151: quark or antiquark line is

1152: 

1153: \begin{eqnarray}

1154: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma^{BV1}}{dt_1 du_1}&=& \frac{2^9}{3}

1155: \frac{1}{(4 \pi)^2} g^4 m^2 (2m_\Phi)^4 \bigg(

1156: \frac{\epsilon_o}{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}} \frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi

1157: \epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^4} \nonumber\\

1158: &&

1159: \times\delta(s+t_1+u_1)\bigg[\frac{1}{D_I-4}-\frac{1}{D_U-4}\bigg].

1160: \label{self}

1161: \end{eqnarray}

1162: 

1163: Note that the result was divided by $2$, because half of the

1164: divergence is used for the renormalization constant of external

1165: quark antiquark wavefunction.  It may be checked that the above

1166: infrared divergence cancels the soft divergence of

1167: Eq.~(\ref{soft-g}).

1168: 

1169: Diagram $<2>$ of Fig.~(\ref{fig:bv}) is the external gluon line

1170: correction. The self energy of the external gluon is

1171: 

1172: \begin{eqnarray}

1173: \Pi_{\alpha \nu}^{ba}(k_1)&=& \frac{1}{2}g^2 N_c \delta^{ba}\int

1174: \frac{d^D k}{(2\pi)^D}\bigg[ (2k^2+2k\cdot k_1+5k_1^2)g_{\alpha

1175: \nu} +(4D-8)k_\alpha k_\nu \nonumber\\

1176: && +(2D-4)(k_\alpha k_{1\nu}+k_\nu

1177: k_{1\alpha})+(D-6)k_{1\alpha}k_{1\nu}\bigg]\frac{1}{(k+k_1)^2

1178: k^2}\nonumber\\

1179: &=&\frac{1}{2}g^2 N_c \delta^{ba}g_{\alpha \nu}\int_0^1 dx \int

1180: \frac{d^D

1181: k}{(2\pi)^D}\bigg[\frac{(6-8/D)k^2}{(k^2-x(1-x)(-k_1^2))^2}\nonumber\\

1182: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

1183: +\frac{(2x^2-2x+5)k_1^2}{(k^2-x(1-x)(-k_1^2))^2}\bigg].

1184: \end{eqnarray}

1185: 

1186: Here, we ignored quark loop contribution, as it is suppressed in

1187: the large $N_c$ limit.  Terms proportional to $k_{1\alpha}$ and

1188: $k_{1 \nu}$ will vanish due to the current conservation condition

1189: of the LO amplitude.   Assuming $k_1$ to be slightly off-shell,

1190: the gluon self energy may be expanded with respect to $k_1^2$.

1191: 

1192: \begin{eqnarray}

1193: \frac{k^2}{(k^2-x(1-x)(-k_1^2))^2}=\frac{1}{k^2}+\frac{2x(1-x)(-k_1^2)}{k^4}+\cdot\cdot\cdot, \nonumber\\

1194: \frac{1}{(k^2-x(1-x)(-k_1^2))^2}=\frac{1}{k^4}+\frac{2x(1-x)(-k_1^2)}{k^6}+\cdot\cdot\cdot.

1195: \end{eqnarray}

1196: 

1197: Keeping only the $1/k^4$ terms,

1198: 

1199: \begin{eqnarray}

1200: \frac{-i}{k_1^2}\Pi_{\alpha \nu}^{ba}(k_1)=\delta^{ba}g_{\alpha

1201: \nu}\frac{g^2 N_c}{(4\pi)^{D/2}\Gamma(D/2)}\frac{10}{3}

1202: \bigg[\frac{\Lambda^{D-4}}{D_I-4}-\frac{\Lambda^{D-4}}{D_U-4}\bigg].

1203: \label{self2}

1204: \end{eqnarray}

1205: 

1206: The differential cross section obtained from multiplying this and

1207: the Born cross section is

1208: 

1209: \begin{eqnarray}

1210: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma^{BV2}}{dt_1 du_1}&=& \frac{2^9}{3}

1211: \frac{1}{(4 \pi)^2} g^4 m^2 (2m_\Phi)^4 \bigg(

1212: \frac{\epsilon_o}{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}} \frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi

1213: \epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^4} \nonumber\\

1214: &&

1215: \times\delta(s+t_1+u_1)\frac{5}{6}\bigg[\frac{1}{D_I-4}-\frac{1}{D_U-4}\bigg].\label{bv2}

1216: \end{eqnarray}

1217: 

1218: Again, the result was divided by $2$ for the same reason.

1219: 

1220: Diagram $<3>$ of Fig.~(\ref{fig:bv}) is the quarkonium external

1221: line correction.  For quarkonium external line, there is no direct

1222: one loop correction in QCD. But we assume that its one loop

1223: correction is the same as that of heavy quark and antiquark lines

1224: in Eq.~(\ref{self}).  This assumption can be proven to be true

1225: from noting that the quarkonium is the bound state of a heavy

1226: quark and an antiquark, and therefore its field operator is a

1227: composite operator composed of a quark and an antiquark field.

1228: 

1229: Diagram $<4>$ of Fig.~(\ref{fig:bv}) is another type of one loop

1230: correction. However it vanishes and has no contribution.

1231: 

1232: \begin{eqnarray}

1233: M_{\mu \nu}^{(a) V4}&=&g^2 C_F \int \frac{d^D

1234: k}{(2\pi)^D}\frac{-i}{k^2+i\varepsilon}\nonumber\\

1235: &\times& \bar{u}(p_1)\bigg[ \gamma^\nu \Delta(p_1-k_1)

1236: \gamma^\beta

1237: \Delta(p_1-k_1+k)M_{\beta \mu}(k)\nonumber\\

1238: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \  +\gamma^\nu \Delta(p_1-k_1) M_{\beta

1239: \mu}(k)\Delta(-p_2-k)\gamma^\beta \nonumber\\

1240: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \  +\gamma^\beta \Delta(p_1+k)M_{\beta

1241: \mu}(k)\Delta(-p_2+k_1)\gamma^\nu \nonumber\\

1242: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \  +M_{\beta \mu}(k)\Delta(-p_2+k_1-k)\gamma^\beta

1243: \Delta(-p_2+k_1)\gamma^\nu \bigg]T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

1244: &=& g^3 C_F \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)

1245: \frac{1+\gamma_0}{2}\gamma^i g_i^\mu

1246: \frac{1-\gamma_0}{2}T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

1247: &&\times \int \frac{d^{D-1} k}{(2\pi)^{D-1}}\vec{k}\cdot

1248: \frac{\partial \psi (p)}{\partial

1249: \vec{p}}\frac{1}{k_{10}}\bigg(\frac{1}{|\vec{k}|^2}-\frac{1}{k_{10}|\vec{k}|}+

1250: \frac{1}{k_{10}(|\vec{k}|+k_{10})}\bigg)= 0.

1251: \end{eqnarray}

1252: 

1253: 

1254: 

1255: Finally diagram $<5>$ of Fig.~(\ref{fig:bv}) is the vertex

1256: correction. Soft collinear divergence of Eq.~(\ref{soft-g}) is

1257: eliminated by these diagrams.  Such cancellation can be

1258: anticipated, because the soft collinear divergence of

1259: Eq.~(\ref{soft-g}) and the cross section coming from multiplying

1260: diagram $<5>$ with a Born diagram are coming from the different

1261: cutting of a two loop diagram for the self energy of the

1262: quarkonium with no infrared divergence.   The amplitude becomes,

1263: 

1264: \begin{eqnarray}

1265: M_{\mu \nu}^{(a) V5} &=& g^2 f^{abc}\int \frac{d^D

1266: k}{(2\pi)^D}\bar{u}(p_1)\bigg[ M_{\mu

1267: \alpha}^{(c)}(k+k_1)\Delta (-p_2-k)\gamma_\beta T^b \nonumber\\

1268: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ + \gamma_\beta T^b

1269: \Delta (p_1+k)M_{\mu

1270: \alpha}^{(c)}(k+k_1)\bigg]v(p_2)\nonumber\\

1271: && \times \frac{(-2k_1-k)^\beta g^{\alpha}_{\nu} +(k_1-k)^\alpha

1272: g_{\nu}^{\beta}+(k_1+2k)_\nu g^{\alpha

1273: \beta}}{(k^2+i\varepsilon)((k_1+k)^2+i\varepsilon)}\nonumber\\

1274: &=& g^3 \sqrt{m_\Phi N_c}\bar{u}(p_1) \frac{1+\gamma_0}{2}\gamma^i

1275: g_i^\mu \frac{1-\gamma_0}{2}T^a v(p_2)\int \frac{d^{D-1}

1276: k}{(2\pi)^{D-1}}\nonumber\\

1277: && \times \bigg[\frac{2k_{10}\frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial

1278: \vec{p}}\cdot \vec{k_1}g_{\nu

1279: 0}+k_{10}(2k_{10}-|\vec{k}|)\frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial

1280: p_j}g_\nu^j-2k_j \frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial \vec{p}}\cdot

1281: (\vec{k}+\vec{k_1})g_\nu^j}{4|\vec{k}|^2(k_{10}|\vec{k}|+\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k_1})}\nonumber\\

1282: &&\ \ \ \ \ +\frac{-2k_{10}\frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial

1283: \vec{p}}\cdot \vec{k_1}g_{\nu

1284: 0}-k_{10}(k_{10}-|\vec{k}|)\frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial

1285: p_j}g_\nu^j+2(k-k_1)_j \frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial

1286: \vec{p}}\cdot \vec{k}

1287: g_\nu^j}{4|\vec{k}|(k_{10}+|\vec{k}|)(k_{10}|\vec{k}|+\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k_1})}\bigg].

1288: \end{eqnarray}

1289: 

1290: Two terms of the last equation are residues at

1291: $k_0=-|\vec{k}|+i\varepsilon$, and at

1292: $k_0=-k_{10}-|\vec{k}+\vec{k_1}|+i\varepsilon$ respectively. In

1293: the second term, $\vec{k}+\vec{k_1}$ was substituted by $\vec{k}$.

1294: If each momentum is set to be

1295: 

1296: \begin{eqnarray}

1297: q&=&(m_\Phi, 0, ... , 0, 0, 0, 0)\nonumber\\

1298: k_1&=&(k_{10}, 0, ... , 0, 0, 0,k_{10}) \nonumber\\

1299: p_1&=&(E_1, 0, ... , 0, 0, |\vec{p}|\sin\theta_1,

1300: |\vec{p}|\cos\theta_1)\nonumber\\

1301: p_2&=&(E_2, 0, ... , 0, 0, -|\vec{p}|\sin\theta_1,

1302: -|\vec{p}|\cos\theta_1+k_{10})\nonumber\\

1303: k&=&(k_{0}, 0, ... ,

1304: 0,|\vec{k}|\sin\theta\sin\varphi,|\vec{k}|\sin\theta\cos\varphi,|\vec{k}|\cos\theta),

1305: \end{eqnarray}

1306: then,

1307: \begin{eqnarray}

1308: M_{\mu \nu}^{(a) V5} &=&g^3 \sqrt{m_\Phi N_c}\bar{u}(p_1)

1309: \frac{1+\gamma_0}{2}\gamma^i g_i^\mu \frac{1-\gamma_0}{2}T^a

1310: v(p_2)\int \frac{d^{D-1}

1311: k}{(2\pi)^{D-1}}\nonumber\\

1312: &&

1313: \times\bigg[\frac{k_{10}^2}{2|\vec{k}|^2(k_{10}+|\vec{k}|)(|\vec{k}|k_{10}+\vec{k}\cdot\vec{k_1})}

1314: \bigg( \vec{k_1}\cdot \frac{

1315: \partial \psi (p)} {\partial \vec{p}}

1316: g_{\nu 0} + k_{10} \frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial p_j } g^j_\nu

1317: \bigg)\nonumber\\

1318: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +g_{\nu 2}\frac{1

1319: }{2k_{10}(k_{10}+|\vec{k}|)}|\vec{p}|\sin\theta_1 \frac{\partial

1320: \psi(p)}{\partial \vec{p}^2}\bigg],\label{v5}

1321: \end{eqnarray}

1322: where $g_{\nu 2}$ means transverse direction with respect to

1323: $\vec{k_1}$.  It is manifest that current conservation condition

1324: $k_1^\nu M_{\mu \nu}^{(a) V}=0$ is satisfied from Eq.~(\ref{v5}),

1325: because Eq.~(\ref{self1}) and Eq.~(\ref{self2}) are intrinsically

1326: zero. The differential cross section from $M^{V5}$, after

1327: multiplying it with the Born diagram, is

1328: 

1329: \begin{eqnarray}

1330: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma^{BV5}}{dt_1 du_1}&=&

1331: \frac{2^9}{3}\frac{1}{(4\pi)^2}g^4 m^2 (2m_\Phi)^4

1332: \bigg(\frac{\epsilon_o}{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}\frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi

1333: \epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^4}\delta(s+t_1+u_1)\nonumber\\

1334: &&\times \bigg[-\frac{2}{(D-4)^2}-\frac{2}{D-4}\bigg(\gamma_E

1335: +\ln\frac{\sqrt{\acute{s}u_1 t_1-m_\Phi^2 t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4

1336: \pi \mu^2 m_\Phi }+\frac{1}{2}\ \bigg)\nonumber\\

1337: &&-\ln^2 \frac{\sqrt{\acute{s}u_1 t_1-m_\Phi^2

1338: t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4 \pi \mu^2 m_\Phi }-(2\gamma_E+1)\ln

1339: \frac{\sqrt{\acute{s}u_1 t_1-m_\Phi^2

1340: t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4 \pi \mu^2 m_\Phi }\nonumber\\

1341: &&-\frac{\pi^2}{6}-\gamma_E^2-\gamma_E\nonumber\\

1342: &&+\frac{1}{D_U-4}+\ln\frac{\sqrt{\acute{s}u_1 t_1-m_\Phi^2

1343: t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}}{4 \pi \mu^2 m_\Phi }+\gamma_E-\frac{1}{2}\

1344: \ \bigg].\label{bv5}

1345: \end{eqnarray}

1346: 

1347: The double pole $1/(D-4)^2$ is cancelled with that of

1348: Eq.~(\ref{soft-g}).

1349: 

1350: 

1351: 

1352: 

1353: 

1354: \subsection{Coupling constant renormalization and soft part mass factorization}

1355: 

1356: The ultraviolet divergence in one loop correction may be removed

1357: by renormalization of the coupling constant $g$.

1358: 

1359: \begin{eqnarray}

1360: g_b \rightarrow g\bigg[ 1+\frac{\alpha_s}{8\pi}\bigg(

1361: \frac{2}{D-4}+\gamma_E+\ln \frac{m^2}{4\pi

1362: \mu^2}\bigg)\beta_0\bigg],

1363: \end{eqnarray}

1364: where the  renormalization scale is set to the heavy quark mass.

1365: $\beta_0=\frac{11}{3}N_c$ in the large $N_c$ limit.

1366: 

1367: The sum of soft differential cross section Eq.~(\ref{soft-g}) and

1368: the terms obtained by multiplying the Born term and its one loop

1369: correction Eq.~(\ref{self}), Eq.~(\ref{bv2}), Eq.~(\ref{bv5})

1370: still has collinear divergence, where Eq.~(\ref{self}) should be

1371: doubled because of quarkonium external leg correction. This

1372: remaining divergence is removed by the soft mass factorization in

1373: Eq.~(\ref{mfs}), which corresponds to substituting the second part

1374: of Eq.~(\ref{mfs}) proportional to $\delta(1-x)$ into

1375: Eq.~(\ref{gmf}). becomes divergence-free.

1376: 

1377: \begin{eqnarray}

1378: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma^{S}}{dt_1 du_1}+\acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2

1379: \sigma^{BV}}{dt_1 du_1} &=& \frac{2^9}{3}\frac{1}{(4\pi)^2}g^4 m^2

1380: (2m_\Phi)^4

1381: \bigg(\frac{\epsilon_o}{m}\bigg)^{\frac{5}{2}}\frac{\acute{s}-2m_\Phi

1382: \epsilon_o}{\acute{s}^4}\delta(s+t_1+u_1)\nonumber\\

1383: &&\times \bigg[\ \ln^2 \delta +2\ln \delta \ln

1384: \frac{\acute{s}}{m_\Phi Q}-\ln \delta -\ln^2 \frac{m \acute{s}}{m_\Phi (\acute{s}+t_1)}\nonumber\\

1385: &&\ \ \ +\ln \frac{m \acute{s}}{m_\Phi (\acute{s}+t_1)}

1386: -\frac{\pi^2}{3}-1+\frac{\Theta}{2}+\frac{11}{6}\ln\frac{m}{Q}\ \

1387: \bigg],  \label{softpart}

1388: \end{eqnarray}

1389: where $\frac{d^2\sigma^{BV}}{dt_1 du_1}$ is the sum of

1390: $\frac{d^2\sigma^{BV1}}{dt_1 du_1}$ through

1391: $\frac{d^2\sigma^{BV5}}{dt_1 du_1}$.

1392: 

1393: Below is the summary of the elementary total cross

1394: section for $\Phi + g \rightarrow Q + \bar{Q} + g$.

1395: 

1396: \begin{eqnarray}

1397: \sigma_{NLO-g}&=&\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow

1398: 0}\frac{1}{\acute{s}^2}\int_{-\frac{\acute{s}}{2s}(s-\Delta+\sqrt{(s-\Delta)^2-4m^2s})}^{-\frac{\acute{s}}{2s}(s-\Delta-\sqrt{(s-\Delta)^2-4m^2s})}dt_1

1399: \int_{\Delta-s-t_1}^{\frac{m_\Phi^2 t_1^2

1400: +m^2\acute{s}^2}{t_1\acute{s}}} du_1\ \  \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2

1401: \sigma^{H}}{dt_1

1402: du_1}\nonumber\\

1403: &+&\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow

1404: 0}\frac{1}{\acute{s}^2}\int_{-\frac{\acute{s}}{2}(1+\sqrt{1-4m^2/s})}^{-\frac{\acute{s}}{2}(1-\sqrt{1-4m^2/s})}dt_1

1405: \int_{-s-t_1}^{\Delta-s-t_1}du_1 \ \bigg( \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2

1406: \sigma^{S}}{dt_1 du_1}+\acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma^{BV}}{dt_1

1407: du_1} \bigg).

1408: \end{eqnarray}

1409: 

1410: Here, $\acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma^{H}}{dt_1 du_1}$ is the sum of

1411: Eq.~(\ref{hard1}), Eq.~(\ref{hard2}), Eq.~(\ref{hardpart}). The

1412: first line and the second line depends on $\Delta$ (or $\delta$).

1413: But their sum is independent of it, because it appears as the

1414: lower cut in the first line and as the upper cut in the second

1415: line.   The results are shown in Fig.~(\ref{fig:eleg}).

1416: 

1417: \section{Upsilon dissociation cross section}

1418: 

1419: % ---------------------- Figure 10. ----------------------------

1420: \begin{figure}

1421: \centerline{ \

1422: \includegraphics[width=6cm, angle=270]{Y+q2.eps}

1423: \hfill

1424: \includegraphics[width=6cm, angle=270]{Y+g2.eps}

1425: }\caption{The left figure is the elementary cross section for

1426: $\Phi+q \rightarrow Q+\bar{Q}+q$ and the right figure is that for

1427: $\Phi+g \rightarrow Q+\bar{Q}+(g)$.  In the right figure, (a) the

1428: dashed line is the Born term given in Eq.~(\ref{locs}). (b) The Dash

1429: dotted line is the hard gluon part, namely, the integration of the

1430: sum of Eq.~(\ref{hard1}), Eq.~(\ref{hard2}), and

1431: Eq.~(\ref{hardpart}) over the hard part of the  Dalitz plot plus

1432: the integration of the `$\ln \delta$' dependent part of

1433: Eq.~(\ref{softpart}) over the soft part of the Dalitz plot.  (c) The

1434: Dotted line is the soft plus one loop correction, namely, the

1435: integration of Eq.~(\ref{softpart}) excluding the `$\ln \delta$'

1436: dependent part over the soft part of the Dalitz plot.   The solid

1437: line is the sum of (a), (b), and (c).} \label{fig:eleg}

1438: \end{figure}

1439: % ---------------------------------------------------------------

1440: As an explicit application, the above result is applied to the

1441: upsilon dissociation cross section. The two independent parameters

1442: of the theory is determined by fitting the physical masses of

1443: $m_{\Upsilon(1S)}$ and $m_{\Upsilon(2S)}$ to the energies of the

1444: Coulomb bound states.  Specifically, from  the relation

1445: $m_{\Upsilon(2S)}-m_{\Upsilon(1S)}=3/4 \epsilon_o$, the binding

1446: energy is found to be $750  MeV$.   Also,  the bottom quark mass

1447: is found to be $5.1\ GeV$ from equating it to

1448: $(m_{\Upsilon(1S)}+\epsilon_o)/2$.  The coupling constant $g$ is

1449: then found to be $2.53$ from $g^2=16\pi/N_c\sqrt{\epsilon_o/m}$.

1450: 

1451: The left and right graphs in Fig.~(\ref{fig:eleg}) represent the

1452: elementary total cross sections of $\Phi+q \rightarrow Q +\bar{Q}

1453: +q$ and $\Phi+g \rightarrow Q +\bar{Q} +g$ respectively.

1454: %In the

1455: %right figure, the hard gluon part is the sum of Eq.~(\ref{hard1}),

1456: %Eq.~(\ref{hard2}), Eq.~(\ref{hardpart}), and $\ln\delta$ dependent

1457: %part of Eq.~(\ref{softpart}).

1458: In both graphs, there are regions of energy where the cross

1459: sections become negative.   These negative cross sections

1460: originate from mass factorization, where finite parts of the

1461: differential cross section have been subtracted out and put into

1462: the definition of the distribution function.   Therefore, the

1463: cross section becomes physical only after folding the elementary

1464: cross sections with the parton distribution functions (PDF) and

1465: adding them to the LO contribution.

1466: 

1467: To obtain the total cross section, we used the MRST2001LO PDF

1468: \cite{mrstlo} for the LO result, and  the MRST2001NLO PDF

1469: \cite{mrstnlo} for the NLO.  We used the PDF calculated in the

1470: $\overline{MS}$ scheme, because our perturbative calculations,

1471: including the subtractions in the mass factorization, were

1472: performed in the $\overline{MS}$ scheme.  If different schemes

1473: were used in the perturbative calculation and in the PDF, the

1474: scheme dependent finite pieces would not match, and the result

1475: would be inconsistent.   In the original scheme of Peskin, the

1476: scale of the PDF was be taken to be the binding energy of the

1477: system, which is 0.75 GeV in the present system.   However, in the

1478: present example, we will take it to be $1.25\ GeV^2$, which is the

1479: minimum $Q^2$ scale in the MRST PDF.

1480: 

1481: The left graph of Fig.~(\ref{fig:result}) shows the total

1482: dissociation cross section to LO and to NLO.  The ratio between

1483: the cross sections calculated to  NLO and to LO, plotted in right

1484: graph of Fig.~(\ref{fig:result}), shows that perturbative QCD

1485: approach is acceptable only in a limited region of energy and

1486: large corrections exist in the threshold region.

1487: 

1488: 

1489: The separation scale of $1.25\ GeV^2$ is low, making it

1490: questionable whether one can apply the present formalism to the

1491: Upsilon system.   On the other hand, one can not take the

1492: separation scale to be arbitrarily large in this example, as one

1493: would invalidate all the counting schemes and the non relativistic

1494: approximations used in deriving the formula.   Nevertheless, to

1495: asses the uncertainties associated with takin the scale of the PDF

1496: to be low, we modified the scale $Q^2$ of PDF to $2.0\ GeV^2$, and

1497: compared the result to that obtained with $Q^2=1.25\ GeV^2$. As

1498: shown in Fig.~(\ref{fig:modi}), the total cross section changes by

1499: less than 10\% for $ \sqrt{s} < 25 GeV$.   As shown in the right

1500: graph of Fig.~(\ref{fig:modi}), $ 25 GeV$ is also the upper limit

1501: of the window of energy region where the ratio between NLO to LO

1502: is minimal.  Hence, although the scale dependence is non

1503: negligible in the present example, the uncertainties are within

1504: the estimated errors coming from the perturbative expansion.

1505: 

1506: 

1507: % ---------------------- Figure 11. ----------------------------

1508: \begin{figure}

1509: \centerline{

1510: \includegraphics[width=6cm, angle=270]{Y+N2.eps}\hfill

1511: \includegraphics[width=6cm, angle=270]{ratio2.eps}}\caption{The

1512: left figure is the $\Upsilon$(1S)+nucleon total cross section to

1513: LO (dashed line) and to  NLO (solid line).  The right figure is

1514: the corresponding ratio between NLO and LO

1515: results.}\label{fig:result}

1516: \end{figure}

1517: % ---------------------------------------------------------------

1518: 

1519: 

1520: % ---------------------- Figure 12. ----------------------------

1521: \begin{figure}

1522: \centerline{

1523: \includegraphics[width=6cm, angle=270]{comparison.eps}\hfill

1524: \includegraphics[width=6cm, angle=270]{comparison_ratio.eps}}\caption{The

1525: left figure is the $\Upsilon$(1S)+nucleon total cross section with

1526: $Q^2=1.25\ GeV^2$(straight line)

1527:  and with $Q^2=2.0\ GeV^2$(dashed line).

1528:  The right figure is the ratio between NLO and LO when

1529: $Q^2=2.0 GeV^2$.}\label{fig:modi}

1530: \end{figure}

1531: % ---------------------------------------------------------------

1532: 

1533: 

1534: We also applied the present calculation to the $J/\psi$

1535: dissociation cross section. But in $J/\psi$ case, the soft plus

1536: one loop correction has large negative value making the hadronic

1537: cross section negative. This suggests that the formalism breaks

1538: down for the charmonium system. As the quarkonium is heavier, the

1539: relative contribution of this negative part is smaller. Therefore

1540: we conclude that charm quark  is not heavy enough to use the

1541: present formalism in the present form.

1542: 

1543: 

1544: 

1545: 

1546: 

1547: \section{Conclusion}

1548: 

1549: We have reported on the NLO calculation for the quarkonium parton

1550: cross section in QCD.  All the collinear divergences have been

1551: shown to cancel through mass factorization and the soft

1552: divergences among themselves.   The result constitutes an exact

1553: QCD calculation at the NLO in the formal heavy quark limit.

1554: 

1555: Explicit application to the Upsilon system shows that there are

1556: large NLO corrections especially near the threshold, as has been

1557: originally anticipated by Peskin\cite{peskin}.

1558: % The present calculation did not

1559: %include a simultaneous systematic correction to the bound state

1560: %wave function and hence constitutes only part of the NLO

1561: % correction.  This part is left as a future work.  Nevertheless, we

1562: % have demonstrated that the formalism will indeed suffer from large

1563: % higher order corrections even in the Upsilon system

1564: Nevertheless, we have identified a window of energy range where

1565: the NLO are under control, such that the perturbative QCD results

1566: are reliable. Moreover, we have identified the origin of large

1567: corrections and assessed the uncertainties through the magnitude

1568: of the higher order correction.

1569: 

1570: The application to the charmonium system confirmed that the

1571: discrepancies existing between LO QCD result and hadronic model

1572: result on the charmonium dissociation cross section by hadrons

1573: especially near threshold are partly due to large higher order

1574: corrections in QCD.   Nevertheless, since the separation scale is

1575: in the order of the binding energy, a thermal mass of few hundred

1576: MeV for the partons will be enough to soften the NLO correction

1577: and to make a perturbative treatment meaningful at finite

1578: temperature.

1579: 

1580: 

1581: 

1582: \section{Acknowledgment}

1583: Authors are grateful to W. Beenakker for his kind help, and also

1584: to T. Hatsuda, and C. Y. Wong for useful discussion. This work was

1585: supported by KOSEF under grant number M02-2004-000-10484-0

1586: 

1587: 

1588: 

1589: 

1590: \appendix

1591: \section{}

1592: 

1593: Here the phase space of 2-body and 3-body decay are reviewed. The

1594: initial flux F is

1595: 

1596: \begin{eqnarray}

1597: F=4\sqrt{(q\cdot k_1)^2-m_q^2 m_{k_1}^2}=2\acute{s},

1598: \end{eqnarray}

1599: 

1600: and the total cross section of 2-body decay is

1601: 

1602: \begin{eqnarray}

1603: \sigma&=&\frac{\mu^{-D+4}}{2\acute{s}}\int \frac{d^D

1604: p_1}{(2\pi)^{D-1}}\int \frac{d^D

1605: p_2}{(2\pi)^{D-1}}\delta^+(p_1^2-m^2)

1606: \delta^+(p_2^2-m^2)\nonumber\\

1607: &&\times (2\pi)^D \delta^D

1608: (p_1+p_2-q-k_1)\overline{|M|^2}\nonumber\\

1609: &=&\frac{\mu^{-D+4}}{2\acute{s}}\int \frac{d^D p_2}{(2\pi)^{D-2}}

1610: \delta^+(p_2^2-m^2) \delta^+((q+k_1-p_2)^2-m^2)\overline{|M|^2}.

1611: \end{eqnarray}

1612: Because

1613: 

1614: \begin{eqnarray}

1615: \int d^D p_2 \delta^+ (p_2^2-m^2)=\frac{1}{2}\int dp_{20}

1616: d|\vec{p_2}|^2 |\vec{p_2}|^{D-3} d\Omega_{D-2}\delta^+

1617: (p_{20}^2-|\vec{p_2}|^2-m^2)\nonumber\\

1618: =\frac{\pi^{D/2-1}}{\Gamma(D/2-1)}\int dE_2 d\cos \chi

1619: (E_2^2-m^2)^{\frac{D-3}{2}}(1-\cos^2 \chi)^{\frac{D-4}{2}},

1620: \end{eqnarray}

1621: where we have used the formula

1622: 

1623: \begin{eqnarray}

1624: \int^\pi_0 \sin^D

1625: d\theta=\sqrt{\pi}\frac{\Gamma(D/2+1/2)}{\Gamma(D/2+1)},

1626: \end{eqnarray}

1627: and

1628: 

1629: \begin{eqnarray}

1630: d\Omega_{D-2}&=&\sin^{D-3}\theta_1 \sin^{D-4}\theta_2 ... \sin

1631: \theta_{D-3} d\theta_1 d\theta_2 ... d\theta_{D-2}\nonumber\\

1632: &=&\frac{2\pi^{D/2-1}}{\Gamma(D/2-1)}\sin^{D-3} \theta_1

1633: d\theta_1,

1634: \end{eqnarray}

1635: the cross section becomes

1636: 

1637: \begin{eqnarray}

1638: \sigma

1639: &=&\frac{\mu^{-D+4}}{2\acute{s}}\frac{1}{(2\pi)^{D-2}}\frac{\pi^{D/2-1}}{\Gamma(D/2-1)}\int

1640: dE_2 d\cos \chi (E_2^2-m^2)^{\frac{D-3}{2}}(1-\cos^2

1641: \chi)^{\frac{D-4}{2}}\nonumber\\

1642: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

1643: \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \times \delta (s+t_1+u_1)\overline{|M|^2},

1644: \end{eqnarray}

1645: where $(q+k_1-p_2)^2-m^2=s+t_1+u_1$.

1646: 

1647: In the center of mass frame of q and $k_1$,

1648: 

1649: \begin{eqnarray}

1650: q&=&(E_q, 0, ... , 0, k_{10})\nonumber\\

1651: k_1&=&(k_{10}, 0, ... , 0, -k_{10})\nonumber\\

1652: p_2&=&(E_2, 0, ... , |\vec{p}|\sin \chi, |\vec{p}|\cos \chi),

1653: \end{eqnarray}

1654: and

1655: \begin{eqnarray}

1656: E_q&=&\frac{s+m_\Phi^2}{2\sqrt{s}}\nonumber\\

1657: k_{10}&=&\frac{\acute{s}}{2\sqrt{s}}\nonumber\\

1658: E_2&=&-\frac{t_1+u_1}{2\sqrt{s}}\nonumber\\

1659: |\vec{p}|&=&\frac{\sqrt{(t_1+u_1)^2-4sm^2}}{2\sqrt{s}}\nonumber\\

1660: \cos \chi &=& \frac{2u_1 s

1661: -(s+m_\Phi^2)(t_1+u_1)}{\acute{s}\sqrt{(t_1+u_1)^2-4sm^2}}.

1662: \label{angle}

1663: \end{eqnarray}

1664: 

1665: From the above relations, the Jacobian from $u_1,t_1$ to $E_2,

1666: \cos \chi$ is

1667: 

1668: \begin{eqnarray}

1669: dE_2 d\cos \chi =

1670: \frac{\sqrt{s}}{\acute{s}\sqrt{(t_1+u_1)^2-4sm^2}}dt_1 du_1.

1671: \end{eqnarray}

1672: 

1673: Then the differential cross section is

1674: 

1675: \begin{eqnarray}

1676: \acute{s}^2\frac{d^2 \sigma}{dt_1

1677: du_1}=\frac{\pi}{\Gamma(D/2-1)}\bigg(\frac{1}{4\pi}\bigg)^{D/2}

1678: \bigg[\frac{\acute{s}u_1 t_1-m_\Phi^2 t_1^2 -m^2

1679: \acute{s}^2}{\mu^2

1680: \acute{s}^2}\bigg]^{\frac{D-4}{2}}\nonumber\\

1681: \times \delta(s+t_1+u_1) \overline{|M|^2}. \label{2-body}

1682: \end{eqnarray}

1683: 

1684: Next, the 3-body phase space is

1685: 

1686: \begin{eqnarray}

1687: \sigma &=& \frac{\mu^{-2(D-4)}}{2\acute{s}}\int \frac{d^D

1688: p_2}{(2\pi)^{D-1}}\int \frac{d^D p_1}{(2\pi)^{D-1}}\int \frac{d^D

1689: k_2}{(2\pi)^{D-1}}\delta^+ (p_2^2-m^2)\nonumber\\ &&\times

1690: \delta^+ (p_1^2-m^2)\delta^+ (k_2^2) (2\pi)^D \delta^D

1691: (q+k_1-p_1-p_2-k_2) \bar{|M|}^2\nonumber\\

1692: \nonumber\\

1693: &=& \frac{1}{2\acute{s}} \frac{\mu^{-2(D-4)}}{(2\pi)^{2D-3}}\int

1694: d^D

1695: p_2 d^D p \delta^+ (p_2^2-m^2) \delta^D (q+k_1-p_2-p)\nonumber\\

1696: &&\times \int d^D k_2 d^D p_1 \delta^+ (p_1^2-m^2) \delta^+

1697: (k_2^2) \delta^D (p-k_2-p_1)\bar{|M|}^2.

1698: \end{eqnarray}

1699: 

1700: In the above equation, new variable p is introduced and

1701: D-dimensional p integration and D-dimension delta function of p

1702: are inserted into phase space. The last line is the same as the

1703: two body phase space, and it becomes

1704: 

1705: \begin{eqnarray}

1706: \frac{-\pi^{\frac{D}{2}}}{2}\frac{\Gamma(\frac{D}{2}-1)}{\Gamma(D-3)}

1707: \frac{(p^2-m^2)^{D-3}}{(p^2)^{\frac{D}{2}-1}}\int^\pi_0 d\theta_1

1708: \sin^{D-3} \theta_1 \int^\pi_0 \sin^{D-4} \theta_2 \bar{|M|}^2.

1709: \end{eqnarray}

1710: 

1711: Moving to $q$ and $k_1$ center of mass frame, the differential

1712: cross section for three body decay is

1713: 

1714: \begin{eqnarray}

1715: \acute{s}^2 \frac{d^2 \sigma}{dt_1 du_1} &=&

1716: \frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{(4\pi)^D}\frac{\mu^{-D+4}}{\Gamma(D-3)}\bigg(\frac{\acute{s}u_1

1717: t_1-m_\Phi^2 t_1^2-m^2\acute{s}^2}{\acute{s}^2 \mu^2 }

1718: \bigg)^{\frac{D-4}{2}}

1719: \frac{s_4^{D-3}}{(s_4+m^2)^{\frac{D}{2}-1}}\nonumber\\

1720: &&\times \int^\pi_0 d\theta_1 \sin^{D-3}\theta_1 \int^\pi_0

1721: d\theta_2 \sin^{D-4}\theta_2 \overline{|M|}^2.

1722: \end{eqnarray}

1723: 

1724: 

1725: 

1726: \section{}

1727: Here the angular integration which are used throughout this work

1728: is derived. The required angular integration has the form

1729: 

1730: \begin{eqnarray}

1731: I_D^{(i,j)}&\equiv& \int^\pi_0 d\theta_1 \sin^{D-3}\theta_1

1732: \int^\pi_0 d\theta_2 \sin^{D-4}\theta_2\frac{1}{\acute{t}^i(\acute{u}+\acute{s})^j}\nonumber\\

1733: &=& \int^\pi_0 d\theta_1  \int^\pi_0 d\theta_2

1734: \frac{\sin^{D-3}\theta_1 \sin^{D-4}\theta_2

1735: }{(a+b\cos\theta_1)^i(A+B\cos\theta_1+C\sin\theta_1

1736: \cos\theta_2)^j},

1737: \end{eqnarray}

1738: where

1739: 

1740: \begin{eqnarray}

1741: A &=&

1742: 2E_q(k_{10}-k_{20})+2k_{10}(k_{10}-|\vec{p}|\cos\varphi)\nonumber\\

1743: B &=& 2k_{20}(|\vec{p}|\cos\varphi-k_{10})\nonumber\\

1744: C &=& 2k_{20}|\vec{p}|\sin \varphi \nonumber\\

1745: a &=& -2k_{10}k_{20}.

1746: \end{eqnarray}

1747: D denote that it is D-dimensional angular integration. If $b=-a,

1748: A^2=B^2+C^2$, the solution has an explicit form

1749: \cite{Beenakker}\cite{neerven}.

1750: 

1751: \begin{eqnarray}

1752: I_D^{(i,j)}=\frac{2\pi}{(2a)^i

1753: (2A)^j}\frac{\Gamma(D/2-i-1)\Gamma(D/2-j-1)\Gamma(D-3)}{\Gamma^2(D/2-1)\Gamma(D-i-j-2)}

1754: \nonumber\\

1755: \times F_{1,2}\bigg[

1756: i,j,\frac{D}{2}-1;\frac{A-B}{2A}\bigg].\label{simplest}

1757: \end{eqnarray}

1758: 

1759: $F_{1,2}$ is the hypergeometric function.

1760: 

1761: \begin{eqnarray}

1762: F_{1,2}(a,b,c;x)\equiv

1763: \frac{\Gamma(c)}{\Gamma(b)\Gamma(c-b)}\int^1_0 dt\

1764: t^{b-1}(1-t)^{c-b-1}(1-tx)^{-a},

1765: \end{eqnarray}

1766: which has the following properties

1767: 

1768: \begin{eqnarray}

1769: F_{1,2}(a,b,c;x)&=&F_{1,2}(b,a,c;x)\nonumber\\

1770: F_{1,2}(0,b,c;x)&=&1.

1771: \end{eqnarray}

1772: 

1773: In the present case $b=-a$, and $A^2 \neq B^2+C^2$. First,

1774: considering $I_D^{(1,1)}$,

1775: 

1776: \begin{eqnarray}

1777: I_D^{(1,1)}&=&

1778: \int^\pi_0 d\theta_1 \int^\pi_0 d\theta_2 \frac{\sin^{D-3}\theta_1

1779: \sin^{D-4}\theta_2}{a(1-\cos\theta_1)(A+B\cos\theta_1+C\sin\theta_1

1780: \cos\theta_2)}\nonumber\\

1781: &=&\frac{1}{a(A+B)}\int^\pi_0 d\theta_1 \int^\pi_0

1782: d\theta_2  \frac{\sin^{D-3}\theta_1 \sin^{D-4}\theta_2}{(1-\cos\theta_1)}\nonumber\\

1783: &&-\frac{1}{a(A+B)}\int^\pi_0 d\theta_1 \int^\pi_0 d\theta_2

1784: \frac{\sin^{D-3}\theta_1

1785: \sin^{D-4}\theta_2}{(1-\cos\theta_1)}\nonumber\\

1786: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \times \bigg[

1787: 1-\frac{A+B}{A+B\cos\theta_1+C\sin\theta_1

1788: \cos\theta_2}\bigg]\nonumber\\

1789: &\equiv& I_1 +I_2,

1790: \end{eqnarray}

1791: where $I$ is separated into infinite part $I_1$ and finite part

1792: $I_2$ in $4$ dimension.

1793: 

1794: From Eq.~(\ref{simplest})

1795: 

1796: \begin{eqnarray}

1797: I_1=\frac{I_D^{(1,0)}}{A+B}=\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)}\frac{2}{D-4},

1798: \end{eqnarray}

1799: and

1800: 

1801: \begin{eqnarray}

1802: I_2&\approx& -\frac{1}{a(A+B)} \int^1_{-1} d\cos \theta_1

1803: \int^\pi_0

1804: d\theta_2 \frac{1}{(1-\cos\theta_1)}\nonumber\\

1805: &&\times \bigg[ 1-\frac{A+B}{A+B\cos\theta_1+C\sin\theta_1

1806: \cos\theta_2}\bigg] +\Theta(D-4)\nonumber\\

1807: &=&-\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)} \int^1_{-1}\frac{d\cos

1808: \theta_1}{1-\cos\theta_1} \nonumber\\

1809: &&\times \bigg[

1810: 1-\frac{A+B}{\sqrt{(A+B\cos\theta_1)^2-C^2\sin^2\theta_1

1811: }}\bigg] +\Theta(D-4)\nonumber\\

1812: &=&\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)} \ln \bigg[ (A+B)^2-(1-\cos

1813: \theta_1)(B^2+C^2+AB)\nonumber\\

1814: &&+(A+B)\sqrt{(A+B\cos\theta_1)^2+C^2\sin^2 \theta_1}\bigg]

1815: \bigg|^{\cos\theta_1=+1}_{\cos\theta_1=-1}+\Theta(D-4)\nonumber\\

1816: &=&\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)} \ln\frac{(A+B)^2}{A^2-B^2-C^2}+\Theta(D-4).

1817: \end{eqnarray}

1818: 

1819: As a result,

1820: 

1821: \begin{eqnarray}

1822: I_D^{(1,1)}=\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)}\bigg[\frac{2}{D-4}+\ln\frac{(A+B)^2}{A^2-B^2-C^2}

1823: \bigg]+\Theta(D-4).

1824: \end{eqnarray}

1825: 

1826: $I_D^{(1,j)}$ with higher order $j$ is derived by differentiating

1827: $I_D^{(1,1)}$ with respect to $A$.

1828: 

1829: \begin{eqnarray}

1830: I_D^{(1,j)}=\frac{(-1)^{j-1}}{(j-1)!}\frac{d^{j-1}}{dA^{j-1}}I_D^{(1,1)}.

1831: \end{eqnarray}

1832: 

1833: Below are the summary of the results. (the subscript `D' is

1834: omitted for simplicity).

1835: 

1836: 

1837: \begin{eqnarray}

1838: I^{(1,0)}=\frac{2\pi}{a}\frac{1}{D-4}

1839: \end{eqnarray}

1840: 

1841: \begin{eqnarray}

1842: I^{(1,1)}&=&\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)}\bigg(\frac{2}{D-4}+\ln\bigg[\frac{(A+B)^2}{A^2-B^2-C^2}\bigg]\nonumber\\

1843: &&+\frac{D-4}{2}\bigg[\ln^2

1844: \frac{A-\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}{A+B}-\frac{1}{2}\ln^2\frac{A+\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}{A-\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}\nonumber\\

1845: &&+2Li_2\bigg(-\frac{B+\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}{A-\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}\bigg)

1846: -2Li_2 \bigg(\frac{A-\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}{A+B}\bigg)\bigg]\nonumber\\

1847: &&+O((D-4)^2)\bigg)

1848: \end{eqnarray}

1849: 

1850: \begin{eqnarray}

1851: I^{(1,2)}=\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)^2}\bigg(\frac{2}{D-4}+\ln\bigg[\frac{(A+B)^2}{A^2-B^2-C^2}\bigg]

1852: +O(D-4)\bigg)

1853: \end{eqnarray}

1854: 

1855: \begin{eqnarray}

1856: I^{(1,3)}=\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)^3}\bigg(

1857: \frac{2}{D-4}+\ln\bigg[\frac{(A+B)^2}{A^2-B^2-C^2}\bigg]+\frac{2A(A+B)}{A^2-B^2-C^2}\nonumber\\

1858: +(A+B)^2\frac{A^2+B^2+C^2}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^2}-3+O(D-4)\bigg)

1859: \end{eqnarray}

1860: 

1861: \begin{eqnarray}

1862: I^{(1,4)}&=&\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)^4}\bigg(

1863: \frac{2}{D-4}+\ln\bigg[\frac{(A+B)^2}{A^2-B^2-C^2}\bigg]+\frac{2A(A+B)}{A^2-B^2-C^2}\nonumber\\

1864: &&+(A+B)^2\frac{A^2+B^2+C^2}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^2}

1865: +(A+B)^3\frac{2A^3+6AB^2+6AC^2}{3(A^2-B^2-C^2)^3}\nonumber\\

1866: &&-11/3+O(D-4)\bigg)

1867: \end{eqnarray}

1868: 

1869: \begin{eqnarray}

1870: I^{(1,5)}&=&\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)^5}\bigg(

1871: \frac{2}{D-4}+\ln\bigg[\frac{(A+B)^2}{A^2-B^2-C^2}\bigg]+\frac{2A(A+B)}{A^2-B^2-C^2}\nonumber\\

1872: &&+(A+B)^2\frac{A^2+B^2+C^2}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^2}

1873: +(A+B)^3\frac{2A(A^2+3B^2+3C^2)}{3(A^2-B^2-C^2)^3}\nonumber\\&&+(A+B)^4

1874: \bigg[\frac{4A^2(B^2+C^2)}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^4}+\frac{1}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^2}\bigg]\nonumber\\

1875: &&-25/4+O(D-4)\bigg)

1876: \end{eqnarray}

1877: 

1878: \begin{eqnarray}

1879:  I^{(1,6)}&=&\frac{\pi}{a(A+B)^6}\bigg(

1880: \frac{2}{D-4}+\ln\bigg[\frac{(A+B)^2}{A^2-B^2-C^2}\bigg]+\frac{2A(A+B)}{A^2-B^2-C^2}\nonumber\\

1881: &&+(A+B)^2\frac{A^2+B^2+C^2}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^2}

1882: +(A+B)^3\frac{2A(A^2+3B^2+3C^2)}{3(A^2-B^2-C^2)^3}\nonumber\\&&+(A+B)^4

1883: \bigg[\frac{4A^2(B^2+C^2)}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^4}+\frac{1}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^2}\bigg]\nonumber\\

1884: &&+(A+B)^5\bigg[\frac{32A^5}{5(A^2-B^2-C^2)^5}-\frac{2A(3A^2+B^2+C^2)}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^4}\bigg]\nonumber\\

1885: &&-137/30+O(D-4)\bigg)

1886: \end{eqnarray}

1887: 

1888: $I^{(0,j)}$ and $I^{(-1,j)}$ may be obtained from \cite{Beenakker}

1889: and by the same method,

1890: 

1891: \begin{eqnarray}

1892: I^{(0,1)}=\frac{\pi\ln\bigg(\frac{A+\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}{A-\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}\bigg)}{\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}

1893: \end{eqnarray}

1894: 

1895: \begin{eqnarray}

1896: I^{(0,2)}=\frac{2\pi}{A^2-B^2-C^2}

1897: \end{eqnarray}

1898: 

1899: \begin{eqnarray}

1900: I^{(0,3)}=\frac{2\pi A}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^2}

1901: \end{eqnarray}

1902: 

1903: \begin{eqnarray}

1904: I^{(0,4)}=-\frac{2\pi(3A^2+B^2+C^2)}{3(A^2-B^2-C^2)^3}

1905: \end{eqnarray}

1906: 

1907: \begin{eqnarray}

1908: I^{(0,5)}=\frac{2\pi A(A^2+B^2+C^2)}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^4}

1909: \end{eqnarray}

1910: 

1911: \begin{eqnarray}

1912: I^{(0,6)}=\frac{2\pi(5A^2+10A^2(B^2+C^2)+(B^2+C^2)^2)}{5(A^2-B^2-C^2)^5}

1913: \end{eqnarray}

1914: 

1915: 

1916: \begin{eqnarray}

1917: I^{(-1,1)}=\pi a \bigg(

1918: -\frac{2B}{B^2+C^2}+\frac{B^2+C^2+AB}{(B^2+C^2)^{3/2}}\ln

1919: \bigg[\frac{A+\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}{A-\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}\bigg]\bigg)

1920: \end{eqnarray}

1921: 

1922: \begin{eqnarray}

1923: I^{(-1,2)}&=&\pi a \bigg(

1924: \frac{2(AB+B^2+C^2)}{(B^2+C^2)(A^2-B^2-C^2)}\nonumber\\

1925: &&-\frac{B}{(B^2+C^2)^{3/2}}\ln

1926: \bigg[\frac{A+\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}{A-\sqrt{B^2+C^2}}\bigg]\bigg)

1927: \end{eqnarray}

1928: 

1929: \begin{eqnarray}

1930: I^{(-1,3)}=\frac{2\pi a(A+B)}{(A^2-B^2-C^2)^2}

1931: \end{eqnarray}

1932: 

1933: \begin{eqnarray}

1934: I^{(-1,4)}=\frac{2\pi a (3A^2+4AB+B^2+C^2)}{3(A^2-B^2-C^2)^3}

1935: \end{eqnarray}

1936: 

1937: \begin{eqnarray}

1938: I^{(-1,5)}=\frac{2\pi

1939: a(3A^3+5A^2B+(3A+B)(B^2+C^2))}{3(A^2-B^2-C^2)^4}

1940: \end{eqnarray}

1941: 

1942: \begin{eqnarray}

1943: &&I^{(-1,6)}=\nonumber\\

1944: \nonumber\\

1945: &&\frac{2\pi

1946: a(5A^4+10A^3B+(10A^2+6AB)(B^2+C^2)+(B^2+C^2)^2)}{5(A^2-B^2-C^2)^5}.

1947: \end{eqnarray}

1948: 

1949: 

1950: 

1951: \section{}

1952: Here the detail calculation of Fig.~(\ref{fig:nlog}) is presented.

1953: $M_1$ through $M_8$ correspond to tree diagrams (1) to (8).

1954: 

1955: $M_1$ is

1956: 

1957: \begin{eqnarray}

1958: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(1)}&=& (ig)^2

1959: \bar{u}(p_1)\Gamma_\mu(p_1,p_1-q)i\Delta(p_1-q) \gamma_\nu T^a

1960: \nonumber\\ &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \times i\Delta(-p_2-k_2)\gamma_\lambda

1961: T^b

1962: v(p_2)\nonumber\\

1963: &=& g^2

1964: \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

1965: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^a T^b v(p_2)\nonumber\\

1966: &&\times \psi(p)\bigg[ g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda

1967: \frac{-1}{k_{20}}\nonumber\\

1968: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ -g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda

1969: \frac{\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_2}}{mk_{20}^2}-g^0_\nu

1970: \frac{p_{2j}g^j_\lambda}{mk_{20}}+g^0_\lambda

1971: \frac{p_{1j}g^j_\nu}{mk_{20}}\bigg].

1972: \end{eqnarray}

1973: 

1974: The first line in the bracket is of $1/(mg^4)$ order, and the

1975: second line is of $1/(mg^2)$ order from Eq.~(\ref{gorder}). As

1976: will be shown later, the sum of $1/(mg^4)$ order terms from $M_1$

1977: to $M_8$ vanishes. As a result, the $1/(mg^2)$ order becomes the

1978: leading order.

1979: 

1980: $M_2$ is

1981: 

1982: \begin{eqnarray}

1983: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(2)}&=&(ig)^2 \bar{u}(p_1)\gamma_\lambda T^b

1984: i\Delta(p_1+k_2) \gamma_\nu T^a i\Delta(q-p_2)  \nonumber\\

1985: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \times \Gamma_\mu(-p_2,q-p_2) v(p_2)\nonumber\\

1986: &=& g^2

1987: \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

1988: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^b T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

1989: &&\times \bigg[ g_\nu^0 g_\lambda^0

1990: \frac{-1}{k_{20}}\psi(p)\nonumber\\

1991: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ +\bigg( g_\nu^j g_\lambda^0

1992: \frac{p_{2j}}{mk_{20}}-g_\nu^0 g_\lambda^j

1993: \frac{p_{1j}}{mk_{20}}-g_\nu^0 g_\lambda^0

1994: \frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_2}}{mk_{20}^2}\bigg) \psi(p)

1995: \nonumber\\

1996: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ +g_\nu^0 g_\lambda^0

1997: \frac{-1}{k_{20}}\frac{\partial \psi (p)}{\partial \vec{p}}\cdot

1998: (-\vec{k_1}+\vec{k_2})\bigg].

1999: \end{eqnarray}

2000: 

2001: The third line in the bracket comes from the expansion of the

2002: Bethe-Salpeter amplitude.

2003: 

2004: \begin{eqnarray}

2005: \Gamma_\mu (p_1+k_2,-p_2+k_1)&=&\Gamma_\mu (\vec{p_1}+\vec{k_2},

2006: \vec{p_1}+\vec{k_2})\label{bsexpansion1}\nonumber\\

2007: &=&\Gamma_\mu (\vec{p_1},\vec{p_1})+\frac{\partial \Gamma_\mu

2008: (\vec{p_1},\vec{p_1})}{\partial \vec{p}}\cdot \vec{k_2}\\

2009: \Gamma_\mu (-p_2,q-p_2) &=&\Gamma_\mu

2010: (\vec{p_1}-\vec{k_1}+\vec{k_2},\vec{p_1}-\vec{k_1}+\vec{k_2})\label{bsexpansion2}\nonumber\\

2011: &=&\Gamma_\mu (\vec{p_1},\vec{p_1})+\frac{\partial \Gamma_\mu

2012: (\vec{p_1},\vec{p_1})}{\partial \vec{p}}\cdot (-\vec{k_1}+\vec{k_2})\\

2013: \Gamma_\mu (p_1-k_1,-p_2-k_2)&=&\Gamma_\mu (\vec{p_1}-\vec{k_1},

2014: \vec{p_1}-\vec{k_1})\nonumber\\

2015: &=&\Gamma_\mu (\vec{p_1},\vec{p_1})+\frac{\partial \Gamma_\mu

2016: (\vec{p_1},\vec{p_1})}{\partial \vec{p}}\cdot (-\vec{k_1}).

2017: \end{eqnarray}

2018: 

2019: $M^3$ is

2020: 

2021: \begin{eqnarray}

2022: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(3)}&=&(ig)^2 \bar{u}(p_1)\gamma_\lambda T^b

2023: i\Delta(p_1+k_2)\Gamma_\mu

2024: (p_1+k_2,-p_2+k_1)\nonumber\\

2025: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \times i\Delta(-p_2+k_1)\gamma_\nu T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2026: &=& g^2

2027: \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2028: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^b T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2029: && \times \bigg[ g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \frac{-\epsilon

2030: +|\vec{p_1}|^2/m}{k_{10}k_{20}}\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2031: && \ \ \ \ \ \ +g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \bigg(

2032: -\frac{\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_1}}{mk_{10}^2}+\frac{\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_1}

2033: -\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_2}}{mk_{10}k_{20}}+\frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_2}}

2034: {mk_{20}^2}\bigg)\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2035: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +\bigg(g^j_\nu g^0_\lambda

2036: \frac{p_{2j}}{m}\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}} +g^0_\nu

2037: g^j_\lambda

2038: \frac{p_{1j}}{m}\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}}\bigg)\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2039: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \bigg(

2040: \frac{2\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_2}}{mk_{10}k_{20}}\psi(p)+\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}}

2041: \frac{\partial \psi (p)}{\partial \vec{p}}\cdot

2042: \vec{k_2}\bigg)\bigg] \nonumber\\

2043: \nonumber\\

2044: &=& g^2

2045: \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2046: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^b T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2047: && \times \bigg[ g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}}\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2048: && \ \ \ \ \ \ +g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \bigg(

2049: -\frac{\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_1}}{mk_{10}^2}+\frac{\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_1}

2050: -\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_2}}{mk_{10}k_{20}}+\frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_2}}

2051: {mk_{20}^2}\bigg)\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2052: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +\bigg(g^j_\nu g^0_\lambda

2053: \frac{p_{2j}}{m}\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}} +g^0_\nu

2054: g^j_\lambda

2055: \frac{p_{1j}}{m}\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}}\bigg)\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2056: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \bigg(

2057: \frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_1}+\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_2}}{mk_{10}k_{20}}\psi(p)+\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}}

2058: \frac{\partial \psi (p)}{\partial \vec{p}}\cdot

2059: \vec{k_2}\bigg)\bigg],\nonumber\\

2060: \end{eqnarray}

2061: 

2062: Notice that $|\vec{p_2}|^2\approx

2063: |\vec{p_1}|^2-2\vec{p_1}\cdot(\vec{k_1}-\vec{k_2})$ from the order

2064: counting of Eq.~(\ref{gorder}). The last line in the last equation

2065: comes from the expansion of the Bethe-Salpeter amplitude in

2066: Eq.~(\ref{bsexpansion1}).

2067: 

2068: Similarly, $M^4$ to $M^8$ are given as below.

2069: 

2070: 

2071: \begin{eqnarray}

2072: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(4)}&=&(ig)^2 \bar{u}(p_1)\gamma_\nu T^a

2073: i\Delta(p_1-k_1)\Gamma_\mu

2074: (p_1-k_1,-p_2-k_2)\nonumber\\

2075: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \times i\Delta(-p_2-k_2)\gamma_\lambda T^b v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2076: &=& g^2

2077: \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2078: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^a T^b v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2079: && \times \bigg[ g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \frac{-\epsilon

2080: +|\vec{p_1}|^2/m}{k_{10}k_{20}}\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2081: && \ \ \ \ \ \ +g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \bigg(

2082: -\frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_1}}{mk_{10}^2}+\frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_1}

2083: -\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_2}}{mk_{10}k_{20}}+\frac{\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_2}}

2084: {mk_{20}^2}\bigg)\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2085: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +\bigg(g^j_\nu g^0_\lambda

2086: \frac{p_{1j}}{m}\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}} +g^0_\nu

2087: g^j_\lambda

2088: \frac{p_{2j}}{m}\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}}\bigg)\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2089: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \bigg(

2090: -\frac{2\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_1}}{mk_{10}k_{20}}\psi(p)+\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}}

2091: \frac{\partial \psi (p)}{\partial \vec{p}}\cdot

2092: (-\vec{k_1})\bigg)\bigg] \nonumber\\

2093: &=& g^2

2094: \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2095: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^b T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2096: && \times \bigg[ g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}}\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2097: && \ \ \ \ \ \ +g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \bigg(

2098: -\frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_1}}{mk_{10}^2}+\frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_1}

2099: -\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_2}}{mk_{10}k_{20}}+\frac{\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_2}}

2100: {mk_{20}^2}\bigg)\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2101: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +\bigg(g^j_\nu g^0_\lambda

2102: \frac{p_{1j}}{m}\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}} +g^0_\nu

2103: g^j_\lambda

2104: \frac{p_{2j}}{m}\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}}\bigg)\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2105: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ -g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda \bigg(

2106: \frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_2}+\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_1}}{mk_{10}k_{20}}\psi(p)+\frac{k_{10}-k_{20}}{k_{10}k_{20}}

2107: \frac{\partial \psi (p)}{\partial \vec{p}}\cdot

2108: \vec{k_1}\bigg)\bigg]\nonumber\\

2109: \end{eqnarray}

2110: 

2111: \begin{eqnarray}

2112: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(5)}&=& (ig)^2

2113: \bar{u}(p_1)\Gamma_\mu(p_1,p_1-q)i\Delta(p_1-q) \gamma_\lambda

2114: T^b\nonumber\\

2115: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \times i\Delta(-p_2+k_1)\gamma_\nu T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2116: &=& g^2

2117: \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2118: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^b T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2119: &&\times \psi(p)\bigg[ g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda

2120: \frac{1}{k_{10}}\nonumber\\

2121: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ +g^0_\nu g^0_\lambda

2122: \frac{\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_1}}{mk_{10}^2}-g^0_\nu

2123: \frac{p_{1j}g^j_\lambda}{mk_{10}}+g^0_\lambda

2124: \frac{p_{2j}g^j_\nu}{mk_{10}}\bigg]

2125: \end{eqnarray}

2126: 

2127: \begin{eqnarray}

2128: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(6)}&=&(ig)^2 \bar{u}(p_1)\gamma_\nu T^a

2129: i\Delta(p_1-k_1) \gamma_\lambda T^b

2130:  i\Delta(q-p_2)  \nonumber\\

2131: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \times \Gamma_\mu(q-p_2,-p_2) v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2132: &=& g^2

2133: \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2134: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^b T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2135: &&\times \bigg[ g_\nu^0 g_\lambda^0

2136: \frac{1}{k_{10}}\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2137: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ +\bigg( g_\nu^j g_\lambda^0

2138: \frac{p_{1j}}{mk_{10}}-g_\nu^0 g_\lambda^j

2139: \frac{p_{2j}}{mk_{10}}+g_\nu^0 g_\lambda^0

2140: \frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_1}}{mk_{10}^2}\bigg) \psi(p)

2141: \nonumber\\

2142: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ +g_\nu^0 g_\lambda^0

2143: \frac{1}{k_{10}}\frac{\partial \psi (p)}{\partial \vec{p}}\cdot

2144: (-\vec{k_1}+\vec{k_2})\bigg]

2145: \end{eqnarray}

2146: 

2147: \begin{eqnarray}

2148: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(7)}&=& ig

2149: \bar{u}(p_1)\Gamma_\mu(p_1,p_1-q)i\Delta(p_1-q)\gamma^\delta T^c

2150: v(p_2)\frac{-i}{(k_1-k_2)^2}

2151: \nonumber\\

2152: &&\times g f_{abc}\bigg( (k_1+k_2)_\delta g_{\nu

2153: \lambda}+(-2k_2+k_1)_\nu g_{\lambda \delta}

2154: +(-2k_1+k_2)_\lambda g_{\nu \delta}\bigg)  \nonumber\\

2155: &=&

2156: g^2\sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2157: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}[T^a, T^b] v(p_2)\frac{1}{(k_1-k_2)^2}\nonumber\\

2158: &&\times \bigg[ (k_1+k_2)_0 g_{\nu \lambda}+(-2k_2+k_1)_\nu

2159: g_{\lambda 0} +(-2k_1+k_2)_\lambda g_{\nu 0}\nonumber\\

2160: &&\ \ \ \ \ \

2161: \frac{\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_1}+\vec{p_1}\cdot\vec{k_2}}{m}g_{\nu

2162: \lambda} +\frac{2k_{1j}p_{1k}+2k_{1k}p_{1j}}{m}g_\nu^j g_\lambda^k

2163: \bigg]\psi(p)

2164: \end{eqnarray}

2165: 

2166: 

2167: \begin{eqnarray}

2168: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(8)}&=& ig \bar{u}(p_1)\gamma^\delta T^c

2169: i\Delta(q-p_2) \Gamma_\mu(q-p_2,-p_2) v(p_2)\frac{-i}{(k_1-k_2)^2}

2170: \nonumber\\

2171: &&\times g f_{abc}\bigg( (k_1+k_2)_\delta g_{\nu

2172: \lambda}+(-2k_2+k_1)_\nu g_{\lambda \delta}

2173: +(-2k_1+k_2)_\lambda g_{\nu \delta}\bigg)  \nonumber\\

2174: &=&

2175: g^2\sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2176: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}[T^a, T^b] v(p_2)\frac{1}{(k_1-k_2)^2}\nonumber\\

2177: &&\times \bigg[ -\bigg((k_1+k_2)_0 g_{\nu \lambda}+(-2k_2+k_1)_\nu

2178: g_{\lambda 0} +(-2k_1+k_2)_\lambda g_{\nu 0}\nonumber\\

2179: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

2180: \frac{\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_1}+\vec{p_2}\cdot\vec{k_2}}{m}g_{\nu

2181: \lambda} +\frac{2k_{1j}p_{2k}+2k_{1k}p_{2j}}{m}g_\nu^j g_\lambda^k

2182: \bigg)\psi(p)\nonumber\\

2183: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ +\bigg((k_1+k_2)_0 g_{\nu \lambda}+(-2k_2+k_1)_\nu

2184: g_{\lambda 0} +(-2k_1+k_2)_\lambda g_{\nu 0}\bigg)\nonumber\\

2185: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \times \frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial

2186: \vec{p}}\cdot (\vec{k_1}-\vec{k_2})\ \ \ \bigg]. \label{c11}

2187: \end{eqnarray}

2188: 

2189: Next considering others,

2190: 

2191: \begin{eqnarray}

2192: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(9)}&=&(ig)^3 \int \frac{d^4

2193: k}{(2\pi)^4}\gamma_\lambda T^b i\Delta(p_1+k_2)\gamma^\sigma T^c

2194: i\Delta(k+q)\Gamma_\mu (k+q,k)\nonumber\\

2195: &&\times i\Delta (k)\gamma^\delta T^d

2196: v(p_2)\frac{-i}{(k+p_2)^2}\frac{-i}{(k+p_2-k_1)^2}\nonumber\\

2197: &&\times g f^{cad}\bigg( (k+p_2-2k_1)_\delta g_{\sigma \nu}

2198: +(k_1+k+p_2)_\sigma g_{\nu \delta} +(-2k-2p_2+k_1)_\nu g_{\sigma

2199: \delta}\bigg)\nonumber\\

2200: &=&

2201: g^2\sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2202: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^b T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2203: &&\times g_\nu^j g_\lambda^0 \frac{1}{k_{20}}\bigg[\

2204: \frac{2p_{1j}}{m}\psi(p)-\bigg(\epsilon-\frac{|\vec{p}|^2}{m}

2205: \bigg)\frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial p_j}\ \bigg]

2206: \end{eqnarray}

2207: 

2208: \begin{eqnarray}

2209: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(10)}&=&(ig)^3 \int \frac{d^4

2210: k}{(2\pi)^4}\gamma^\sigma T^c i\Delta (k)\Gamma_\mu

2211: (k,k-q)i\Delta(k-q)\gamma^\delta T^d \nonumber\\

2212: &&\times i\Delta(-p_2-k_2)\gamma_\lambda T^b v(p_2)

2213: \frac{-i}{(k-p_1)^2}\frac{-i}{(k-p_1+k_1)^2}\nonumber\\

2214: &&\times g f^{cad}\bigg( (k-p_1-k_1)_\delta g_{\sigma \nu}

2215: +(2k_1+k-p_1)_\sigma g_{\nu \delta} +(-2k+2p_1-k_1)_\nu g_{\sigma

2216: \delta}\bigg)\nonumber\\

2217: &=&

2218: g^2\sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2219: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^a T^b v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2220: &&\times g_\nu^j g_\lambda^0 \frac{1}{k_{20}}\bigg[\

2221: -\frac{2p_{1j}}{m}\psi(p)+\bigg(\epsilon-\frac{|\vec{p}|^2}{m}

2222: \bigg)\frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial p_j}\ \bigg]

2223: \end{eqnarray}

2224: 

2225: \begin{eqnarray}

2226: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(11)}&=&(ig)^3 \int \frac{d^4

2227: k}{(2\pi)^4}\gamma_\nu T^a i\Delta (p_1-k_1)\gamma^\sigma T^c

2228: i\Delta(k+q) \Gamma_\mu

2229: (k,k+q) \nonumber\\

2230: &&\times i\Delta(k)\gamma^\delta T^d v(p_2)

2231: \frac{-i}{(k+p_2)^2}\frac{-i}{(k+p_2+k_2)^2}\nonumber\\

2232: &&\times g f^{cdb}\bigg( (2k+2p_2+k_2)_\lambda g_{\sigma \delta}

2233: +(k_2-k-p_2)_\sigma g_{\lambda \delta} +(-k-p_2-2k_2)_\delta

2234: g_{\sigma

2235: \lambda}\bigg)\nonumber\\

2236: &=&

2237: g^2\sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2238: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^a T^b v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2239: &&\times g_\nu^0 g_\lambda^j \frac{1}{k_{10}}\bigg[\

2240: -\frac{2p_{1j}}{m}\psi(p)+\bigg(\epsilon-\frac{|\vec{p}|^2}{m}

2241: \bigg)\frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial p_j}\ \bigg]

2242: \end{eqnarray}

2243: 

2244: \begin{eqnarray}

2245: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(12)}&=&(ig)^3 \int \frac{d^4

2246: k}{(2\pi)^4}\gamma^\sigma T^c i\Delta(k)\Gamma_\mu (k,k-q)

2247: i\Delta(k-q) \gamma^\delta T^d   \nonumber\\

2248: &&\times i\Delta (-p_2+k_1)\gamma_\nu T^a v(p_2)

2249: \frac{-i}{(k-p_1)^2}\frac{-i}{(k-p_1-k_2)^2}\nonumber\\

2250: &&\times g f^{cdb}\bigg( (2k-2p_1-k_2)_\lambda g_{\sigma \delta}

2251: +(2k_2-k+p_1)_\sigma g_{\lambda \delta} +(-k+p_1-k_2)_\delta

2252: g_{\sigma

2253: \lambda}\bigg)\nonumber\\

2254: &=&

2255: g^2\sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2256: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}T^b T^a v(p_2)\nonumber\\

2257: &&\times g_\nu^0 g_\lambda^j \frac{1}{k_{10}}\bigg[\

2258: \frac{2p_{1j}}{m}\psi(p)-\bigg(\epsilon-\frac{|\vec{p}|^2}{m}

2259: \bigg)\frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial p_j}\ \bigg]

2260: \end{eqnarray}

2261: 

2262: 

2263: \begin{eqnarray}

2264: M_{\mu\nu\lambda}^{(16)}&=&(ig)^2 \int \frac{d^4

2265: k}{(2\pi)^4}\gamma^\sigma T^c i\Delta(k)\Gamma_\mu (k,k-q)

2266: i\Delta(k-q) \gamma^\delta T^d v(p_2)  \nonumber\\

2267: &&\times

2268: \frac{-i}{(k-p_1)^2}\frac{-i}{(k-p_1+k_1-k_2)^2}\frac{-i}{(k_1-k_2)^2}\nonumber\\

2269: &&\times g f^{ced}\bigg( (k-p_1-k_1+k_2)_\delta g_{\sigma

2270: \varepsilon} +(2k_1-2k_2+k-p_1)_\sigma g_{\varepsilon

2271: \delta}\nonumber\\

2272: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \  +(-2k+2p_1-k_1+k_2)_\varepsilon

2273: g_{\sigma

2274: \delta}\bigg)\nonumber\\

2275: && \times g f^{eab}\bigg( (-2k_1+k_2)_\lambda g_{\nu \varepsilon}

2276: +(k_1+k_2)_\varepsilon g_{\nu \lambda}+(k_1-2k_2)_\nu

2277: g_{\varepsilon \lambda}\bigg)\nonumber\\

2278:  &=&

2279: g^2\sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c}}\bar{u}(p_1)\frac{1+\gamma^0}{2}\gamma_i

2280: g^{i\mu}\frac{1-\gamma^0}{2}\ [T^a, T^b]\ v(p_2)\frac{1}{(k_1-k_2)^2}\nonumber\\

2281: &&\times \bigg( (-2k_1+k_2)_\lambda g_{\nu j} +(k_1+k_2)_j g_{\nu

2282: \lambda}+(k_1-2k_2)_\nu

2283: g_{j \lambda}\bigg)\nonumber\\

2284: &&\times \bigg[\

2285: \frac{2p_1^j}{m}\psi(p)-\bigg(\epsilon-\frac{|\vec{p}|^2}{m}

2286: \bigg)\frac{\partial \psi(p)}{\partial p^j}\ \bigg]

2287: \end{eqnarray}

2288: 

2289: Because $M^{(13)}\sim M^{(15)}$ are higher order  in the order

2290: counting of Eq.~(\ref{gorder}) compared to the other terms, they

2291: were ignored. Summing all amplitudes from $M^{(1)}$ to $M^{(16)}$,

2292: the total invariant amplitude is given as,

2293: 

2294: \begin{eqnarray}

2295: M^{\mu \nu \lambda } &=& \bigg[ \bigg(\frac{ \partial \psi (p

2296: )}{\partial \vec{p}} \cdot \vec{k_1} \bigg) \bigg(-g^\lambda_0

2297: g^\nu_0 \frac{1}{k_{20}} + \frac{1}{k_1 \cdot k_2 } (g^\lambda_0

2298: k^\nu_2

2299: +g^\nu_0 k^\lambda_1 - g^{\nu \lambda } k_{20}) \bigg) \nonumber\\

2300: &&+\bigg(\frac{ \partial \psi (p )}{\partial \vec{p}} \cdot

2301: \vec{k_2} \bigg) \bigg(g^\lambda_0 g^\nu_0 \frac{1}{k_{10}} -

2302: \frac{1}{k_1 \cdot k_2 } (g^\lambda_0 k^\nu_2 +g^\nu_0 k^\lambda_1

2303: - g^{\nu \lambda } k_{10}) \bigg)

2304: \nonumber\\

2305: &&+(k_{10 } -k_{20 }) \frac{\psi(p) }{\partial p_{j}}

2306: \bigg(-g^\lambda_j g^\nu_0 \frac{1}{k_{10 }} -g^\lambda_0 g^\nu_j

2307: \frac{1}{k_{20}} +\frac{1}{k_1 \cdot k_2 } (g^\nu_j k^\lambda_1

2308: +g^\lambda_j k^\nu_2 )\bigg) \bigg] \nonumber\\

2309: &&\ \ \ \ \ \ \times g^2 \sqrt{\frac{m_\Phi}{N_c }}

2310: \overline{u}(p_1 )\frac{1+\gamma_0 }{2} \gamma_i g^{\mu

2311: i}\frac{1-\gamma_0}{2}\ [T^a ,T^b ]\ v(p_2 ).

2312: \end{eqnarray}

2313: 

2314: 

2315: \section{}

2316: 

2317: In this appendix, we summarize the present counting scheme and

2318: give details on determining the scaling properties of certain

2319: diagrams.  To begin with, the binding energy of the quarkonium

2320: scales as,

2321: \begin{eqnarray}

2322: \epsilon=m(N_cg^2/16\pi)^2 \sim O(mg^4).

2323: \end{eqnarray}

2324: In the quarkonium rest frame, the  energy conservation condition

2325: for the process $\Phi+q,g(k_1) \rightarrow

2326: Q(p_1)+\bar{Q(p_2)}+q,g(k_2)$ is,

2327: 

2328: \begin{eqnarray}

2329: \epsilon_0=k_{10}-k_{20}-\frac{|\vec{p_1}|^2}{2m}-\frac{|\vec{p_2}|^2}{2m},

2330: \end{eqnarray}

2331: where $\epsilon_0$ is the binding energy of the quarkonium, and

2332: $k_{10}$, $k_{20}$ are the energies of the incoming and outgoing

2333: partons respectively. $\vec{p_1}$ and $\vec{p_2}$ are respectively

2334: the three momenta of the heavy quark and antiquark from the

2335: quarkonium. From this relation, the following order counting can

2336: be deduced.

2337: \begin{eqnarray}

2338: |\vec{p_1}|\sim |\vec{p_2}|\sim O(mg^2), \ \ \ \ \ k_{10}\sim

2339: k_{20}\sim O(mg^4).

2340: \end{eqnarray}

2341: 

2342: The counting for the internal gluon loop momentum $K$, which

2343: connects the heavy quark and antiquark within the bound state, can

2344: be deduced from Eq.~(\ref{hardg}).  Since the left hand side of

2345: Eq.~(\ref{hardg}) is of $O(mg^4)$, $K$ must be of $O(mg^2)$. In

2346: contrast, the order of gluon momenta appearing in the perturbative

2347: one loop correction should be of $O(mg^4)$.  This is so because

2348: the separation scale, which sets the cut off in the perturbative

2349: diagrams, are set to the binding energy, which is of $O(mg^4)$.

2350: Within the bound state loop, the internal energy and heavy quark

2351: propagator can be counted as $O(mg^4)$.

2352: 

2353: From the above considerations, the order of each Feynman rules can

2354: be deduced and the results are listed in table

2355: (\ref{tab:Feynman}).  Bound gluon means that it is the internal

2356: gluon, which produces the coulomb bound state, and whose momentum

2357: $K$ scales as $O(mg^2)$.   There are two types of three gluon

2358: vertex.  In the first one, the vertex combines two bound gluons

2359: and one external gluon, while in the other, it combines three

2360: external gluons.

2361: 

2362: The order of a diagram can be deduced from the above order

2363: counting scheme.   For example, the left and the right diagrams of

2364: the Bethe-Salpeter equation in Fig.(\ref{fig:BS}) can be shown to

2365: be of the same order.  Compared to the left diagram, the right

2366: diagram has an addition internal loop ($ (mg^4)\times (mg^2)^3$),

2367: two heavy quark propagator ($ (mg^4)^{-2}$), a bound gluon

2368: propagator ($ (mg^2)^{-2}$), and two coupling constant ($g^2$),

2369: which altogether gives order 1, as the left diagram.

2370: 

2371: The suppression of diagrams (13), (14) and (15) to the other

2372: diagrams in Fig.~(\ref{fig:nlog}) may also be explained. Comparing

2373: diagrams (13) or (14) to (9), diagram (9) has additionally a heavy

2374: quark propagator ($(mg^4)^{-1}$) and a quark gluon vertex ($g$),

2375: while diagram (13) or (14) has additionally a bound gluon

2376: propagator ($(mg^2)^{-2}$) and a three gluon vertex (two bound

2377: gluon + one external gluon of ($O(mg^3)$).  Hence diagram (13) or

2378: (14) is suppressed by $O(g^2)$ relative to diagram (9). Similarly,

2379: diagram (15) does not have a three gluon vertex ($O(mg^3)$) nor a

2380: heavy quark propagator ($(mg^4)^{-1}$) but an additional four

2381: gluon vertex ($g^2$) compared to diagram (9), and hence is

2382: relatively suppressed by a factor of $g^2$.

2383: 

2384: In certain cases, the simple counting scheme has to be implemented

2385: with care.   As an example, consider comparing the order of the

2386: first two diagrams to the third diagram in Fig.~(\ref{fig:lo}).

2387: Using our naive counting scheme above, the third diagram can be

2388: shown to be suppressed by $g^2$ compared to the first two

2389: diagrams. However, in this case, the first two diagrams cancel to

2390: leading order in the counting and combine to give the same order

2391: as the third diagram.

2392: 

2393: 

2394: \begin{table}[t]

2395: \centering

2396: \begin{tabular}{ccc}

2397: \hline Feynman diagram & order & reference \\

2398: \hline heavy quark (antiquark) propagator & $(mg^4)^{-1}$ &

2399: Eq.~(\ref{qpropa}) \\

2400: bound gluon propagator & $(mg^2)^{-2}$ & Eq.~(\ref{hardg}) \\

2401: external gluon momentum & $mg^4$ & Eq.~(\ref{gorder}) \\

2402: bound gluon momentum & $mg^2$ & \\

2403:  three gluon vertex (two bound and one

2404: external gluons) &

2405: $mg^3$ &\\

2406: three gluon vertex (three external gluons) & $mg^5$ &\\

2407: \hline

2408: \end{tabular}

2409: \bigskip

2410: \caption{Order counting for various Feynman diagrams}

2411: \label{tab:Feynman}

2412: \end{table}

2413: 

2414: 

2415: \begin{thebibliography}{999}

2416: 

2417: \bibitem{peskin} M. E. Peskin, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 156}, 365

2418: (1979).

2419: 

2420: \bibitem{Bhanot} G. Bhanot and M. E. Peskin, ibid. B {\bf 156}, 391

2421: (1979).

2422: 

2423: \bibitem{Kharzeev94}

2424: D.~Kharzeev and H.~Satz,

2425: %``Quarkonium interactions in hadronic matter,''

2426: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 334}, 155 (1994). %[arXiv:hep-ph/9405414].

2427: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9405414;%%

2428: 

2429: \bibitem{Kharzeev96}

2430: D.~Kharzeev, H.~Satz, A.~Syamtomov and G.~Zinovev,

2431: %``On the sum rule approach to quarkonium hadron interactions,''

2432: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 389}, 595 (1996). %[arXiv:hep-ph/9605448].

2433: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9605448;%%

2434: 

2435: \bibitem{Arleo}

2436: F.~Arleo, P.~B.~Gossiaux, T.~Gousset and J.~Aichelin,

2437: %``Heavy quarkonium hadron cross section in QCD at leading twist,''

2438: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65},  014005 (2002). %[arXiv:hep-ph/0102095].

2439: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0102095;%%

2440: 

2441: \bibitem{Oh} Y. Oh, S. Kim, and S. H. Lee, Phys. Rev. C 65, 067901

2442: (2002).

2443: 

2444: \bibitem{Kharzeev1} D. E. Kharzeev, Nucl. Phys. A {\bf 638}, 279c

2445: (1998).

2446: 

2447: \bibitem{quark-exchange} K. Martins, D. Blaschke, and E. Quack, Phys.

2448: Rev. C {\bf 51}, 2723 (1995).

2449: 

2450: \bibitem{barnes1}  C.-Y. Wong, E. S. Swanson, and T.

2451: Barnes, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 62}, 045201 (2000); C.Y.Wong, E. S.

2452: Swanson, T. Barnes, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 65} 014903 (2002); T.

2453: Barnes, E. S. Swanson, C.Y. Wong, X.M. Xu, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 68},

2454: 014903 (2003).

2455: 

2456: \bibitem{meson-exchange}S. G. Matinyan and B. M\"{u}ller, Phys. Rev. C

2457: {\bf 58}, 2994 (1998).

2458: 

2459: \bibitem{Haglin} K. L. Haglin, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 61}, 031902(R) (2000); K.

2460: Haglin, C. Gale, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 63}, 065201 (2001)

2461: 

2462: \bibitem{Lin}  Z. Lin and C. M. Ko, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 62}, 034903

2463: (2000); W. Liu, C. M. Ko, Z.W. Lin, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 65}, 015203

2464: (2002).

2465: 

2466: \bibitem{Oh1} Y. Oh, T. Song, and S. H. Lee, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 63}, 034901

2467: (2001).

2468: 

2469: \bibitem{Ivanov}  V. V. Ivanov, Yu. L. Kalinovsky, D. B. Blaschke, G.R.G. Burau,

2470: hep-ph/0112354.

2471: 

2472: \bibitem{Sibirtsev} A. Sibirtsev, K. Tsushima, A. W. Thomas, Phys. Rev. C {\bf

2473: 63}, 044906 (2001).

2474: 

2475: \bibitem{Navarra} F. S. Navarra, M. Nielsen, M.R. Robilotta, Phys. Rev. C {\bf

2476: 64}, 021901 (R) (2001).

2477: 

2478: \bibitem{Nielsen1} F.~S.~Navarra, M.~Nielsen, R.~S.~Marques de Carvalho and G.~Krein,

2479: %``Charmonium pion cross section from QCD sum rules,''

2480: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 529}, 87 (2002). %[arXiv:nucl-th/0105058].

2481: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 0105058;%%

2482: 

2483: \bibitem{Nielsen2}

2484: F.~O.~Duraes, S.~H.~Lee, F.~S.~Navarra and M.~Nielsen,

2485: %``J/psi dissociation by pions in QCD,''

2486: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 564}, 97 (2003). %[arXiv:nucl-th/0210075].

2487: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 0210075;%%

2488: 

2489: 

2490: \bibitem{Nielsen3}

2491: F.~O.~Duraes, H.~c.~Kim, S.~H.~Lee, F.~S.~Navarra and M.~Nielsen,

2492: %``Progress in the determination of the J/psi pi cross section. ((T)),''

2493: Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 68}, 035208 (2003). %[arXiv:nucl-th/0211092].

2494: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 0211092;%%

2495: 

2496: \bibitem{Dosch99}

2497:   H.~G.~Dosch, F.~S.~Navarra, M.~Nielsen and M.~Rueter,

2498:   %``Charmonium-hadron cross section in a nonperturbative QCD approach,''

2499:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 466}, 363 (1999).

2500: 

2501: \bibitem{Lee} S. H. Lee and Y. Oh, J. Phys. G {\bf 28}, 1903

2502: (2002).

2503: 

2504: \bibitem{Beenakker} W. Beenakker, H. Kuijf, and W. L. van Neerven,

2505: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 40}, 54 (1989).

2506: 

2507: \bibitem{neerven} W. L. Van Neerven, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 268}, 453

2508: (1986).

2509: 

2510: \bibitem{mrstlo} A. D. Martin, R. G. Roberts, W. J. Stirling, and

2511: R. S. Thorne, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 531}, 216 (2002).

2512: 

2513: \bibitem{mrstnlo} A. D. Martin, R. G. Roberts, W. J. Stirling, and

2514: R. S. Thorne, Eur. Phys. J. C {\bf 23}, 73 (2002).

2515: 

2516: \end{thebibliography}

2517: 

2518: \end{document}

2519: