1: \documentclass[12pt,prd,showpacs,tightenlines,nofootinbib]{revtex4}
2: %\documentclass[prd,showpacs,nofootinbib]{revtex4}
3: \usepackage{bm}
4: \usepackage{graphics}
5: \usepackage{rotating}
6: \usepackage{epsfig}
7: \begin{document}
8: \title{\begin{flushright}{\rm\normalsize HU-EP-06/04}\end{flushright}
9: Relativistic treatment of the decay constants of light
10: and heavy mesons}
11: \author{D. Ebert}
12: \affiliation{Institut f\"ur Physik, Humboldt--Universit\"at zu Berlin,
13: Newtonstr. 15, D-12489 Berlin, Germany}
14: \author{R. N. Faustov}
15: \author{V. O. Galkin}
16: \affiliation{Institut f\"ur Physik, Humboldt--Universit\"at zu Berlin,
17: Newtonstr. 15, D-12489 Berlin, Germany}
18: \affiliation{Dorodnicyn Computing Centre, Russian Academy of Sciences,
19: Vavilov Str. 40, 119991 Moscow, Russia}
20:
21: \begin{abstract}
22: Novel relativistic expressions are used to calculate the weak
23: decay constants of pseudoscalar and vector mesons within the
24: constituent quark model. Meson wave functions satisfy the
25: quasipotential equation with the complete relativistic potential.
26: New contributions, coming from the negative-energy quark states,
27: are substantial for the light mesons, significantly decrease the
28: values of their decay constants and, thus, bring them into
29: agreement with experiment. For heavy-light mesons these
30: contribution are much less pronounced, but permit to reduce
31: uncertainties of the predicted decay constants. Their values agree
32: with the results of lattice calculations and experimental data.
33:
34: \end{abstract}
35:
36: \pacs{13.20.-v, 14.40.-n, 12.39.Ki}
37:
38: \maketitle
39:
40:
41: The weak decay constants of pseudoscalar and vector mesons belong to
42: their most important characteristics, which enter in various decay rates.
43: Many efforts were undertaken to calculate these constants within lattice
44: QCD (both quenched and unquenched) \cite{akr,ak,milc,ml,hpqcd,chllc}, QCD
45: sum rules \cite{nar,ps,jl},
46: and constituent quark models \cite{gi,mr,k,gmf,efgdc,ckwn,hjd}. At present,
47: the decay constants of light mesons are measured with high precision,
48: while in the heavy-light meson sector only $D$ and $D_s$ meson decay
49: constants are available with rather large errors \cite{pdg}. Recently,
50: a relatively precise experimental value for the
51: $D$ meson decay constant was presented by the CLEO Collaboration \cite{cleo}.
52: Therefore it is actual to reconsider the meson decay
53: constants treating quarks, composing the meson, in a consistently
54: relativistic way.
55: Such procedure was formulated and successfully applied
56: for light mesons in the papers \cite{lmm}. In this letter we evaluate new
57: contributions to relativistic expressions for the meson decay
58: constants coming from the negative-energy quark states both for light
59: and heavy-light mesons. We use the meson wave functions satisfying the
60: quasipotential equation with the complete
61: relativistic potential in order to obtain new,
62: more accurate predictions for the meson decay constants.
63:
64:
65:
66:
67: In the quasipotential approach a meson is described by the wave
68: function of the bound quark-antiquark state~\cite{efg}, which satisfies the
69: quasipotential equation of the Schr\"odinger type
70: \begin{equation}
71: \label{quas}
72: {\left(\frac{b^2(M)}{2\mu_{R}}-\frac{{\bf
73: p}^2}{2\mu_{R}}\right)\Psi_{M}({\bf p})} =\int\frac{d^3 q}{(2\pi)^3}
74: V({\bf p,q};M)\Psi_{M}({\bf q}),
75: \end{equation}
76: where the relativistic reduced mass is
77: \begin{equation}
78: \mu_{R}=\frac{E_1E_2}{E_1+E_2}=\frac{M^4-(m^2_1-m^2_2)^2}{4M^3},
79: \end{equation}
80: and $E_1$, $E_2$ are given by
81: \begin{equation}
82: \label{ee}
83: E_1=\frac{M^2-m_2^2+m_1^2}{2M}, \quad E_2=\frac{M^2-m_1^2+m_2^2}{2M}.
84: \end{equation}
85: Here $M=E_1+E_2$ is the meson mass, $m_{1,2}$ are the quark masses,
86: and ${\bf p}$ is their relative momentum.
87: In the center-of-mass system the relative momentum squared on mass shell
88: reads
89: \begin{equation}
90: {b^2(M) }
91: =\frac{[M^2-(m_1+m_2)^2][M^2-(m_1-m_2)^2]}{4M^2}.
92: \end{equation}
93:
94: The kernel
95: $V({\bf p,q};M)$ in Eq.~(\ref{quas}) is the quasipotential operator of
96: the quark-antiquark interaction. It is constructed with the help of the
97: off-mass-shell scattering amplitude, projected onto the positive
98: energy states.
99: Constructing the quasipotential of the quark-antiquark interaction,
100: we have assumed that the effective
101: interaction is the sum of the usual one-gluon exchange term with the mixture
102: of long-range vector and scalar linear confining potentials, where
103: the vector confining potential
104: contains the Pauli interaction. The quasipotential is then defined by
105: \footnote{In our notation, where strong annihilation processes are neglected,
106: antiparticles are described by usual spinors taking into account the
107: proper quark charges.}
108: \begin{equation}
109: \label{qpot}
110: V({\bf p,q};M)=\bar{u}_1({\bf p})\bar{u}_2(-{\bf p}){\mathcal V}({\bf p},
111: {\bf q};M)u_1({\bf q})u_2(-{\bf q}),
112: \end{equation}
113: with
114: $${\mathcal V}({\bf p},{\bf q};M)
115: \equiv{\mathcal V}({\bf p}-{\bf q})=\frac{4}{3}\alpha_sD_{ \mu\nu}({\bf
116: k})\gamma_1^{\mu}\gamma_2^{\nu}
117: +V^V_{\rm conf}({\bf k})\Gamma_1^{\mu}
118: \Gamma_{2;\mu}+V^S_{\rm conf}({\bf k}),$$
119: where $\alpha_s$ is the QCD coupling constant, $D_{\mu\nu}$ is the
120: gluon propagator in the Coulomb gauge and
121: ${\bf k=p-q}$; $\gamma_{\mu}$ and $u({\bf p})$ are Dirac matrices and spinors.
122: The effective long-range vector vertex is given by
123: \begin{equation}
124: \label{kappa}
125: \Gamma_{\mu}({\bf k})=\gamma_{\mu}+
126: \frac{i\kappa}{2m}\sigma_{\mu\nu}k^{\nu},
127: \end{equation}
128: where $\kappa$ is the Pauli interaction constant characterizing the
129: anomalous chromomagnetic moment of quarks. Vector and
130: scalar confining potentials in the nonrelativistic limit reduce to
131: \begin{eqnarray}
132: \label{vlin}
133: V^V_{\rm conf}(r)&=&(1-\varepsilon)(Ar+B),\nonumber\\
134: V^S_{\rm conf}(r)& =&\varepsilon (Ar+B),
135: \end{eqnarray}
136: reproducing
137: \begin{equation}
138: \label{nr}
139: V_{\rm conf}(r)=V^S_{\rm conf}(r)+V^V_{\rm conf}(r)=Ar+B,
140: \end{equation}
141: where $\varepsilon$ is the mixing coefficient.
142:
143: All the model parameters have the same values as in our previous
144: papers \cite{egf,efg}.
145: The constituent quark masses $m_u=m_d=0.33$ GeV, $m_s=0.5$ GeV,
146: $m_c=1.55$ GeV, $m_b=4.88$ GeV and
147: the parameters of the linear potential $A=0.18$ GeV$^2$ and $B=-0.3$ GeV
148: have the usual values of quark models. The values of the mixing
149: coefficient of vector and scalar confining potentials $\varepsilon=-1$
150: and the universal Pauli interaction constant $\kappa=-1$ are specific
151: for our model.
152:
153: The quasipotential (\ref{qpot}) can be used for arbitrary quark
154: masses. The substitution
155: of the Dirac spinors into (\ref{qpot}) results in an extremely
156: nonlocal potential in the configuration space. Clearly, it is very hard to
157: deal with such potentials without any additional transformations.
158: In oder to simplify the relativistic $q\bar q$ potential, we make the
159: following replacement in the Dirac spinors \cite{egf,lmm}:
160: \begin{equation}
161: \label{eq:sub}
162: \epsilon_{1,2}(p)=\sqrt{m_{1,2}^2+{\bf p}^2} \to E_{1,2}.
163: \end{equation}
164: This substitution makes the Fourier transformation of the potential
165: (\ref{qpot}) local, but the resulting relativistic potential becomes
166: dependent on the meson mass in a very complicated nonlinear way.
167: We consider only the meson ground
168: states, which further simplifies our analysis, since all terms
169: containing orbital momentum vanish. The detailed expressions for the
170: relativistic quark potential can be found in Ref.~\cite{lmm}. Here we
171: use these formulas for the calculation of the ground state meson masses.
172: We solve numerically the quasipotential equation with the local
173: fully relativistic potential, which includes both spin-independent and
174: spin-dependent parts. As a result we get the relativistic wave
175: functions of the ground state mesons which depend
176: nonperturbatively on the meson spin (i.e. the pseudoscalar and vector
177: meson wave functions are different). These wave functions are used
178: below for calculating the decay constants of light and heavy mesons.
179: The obtained masses of the pseudoscalar and vector
180: mesons are given in Table~\ref{tab:mass} in comparison with the
181: experimental data \cite{pdg}. The overall good agreement of our
182: predictions with experiment is found.
183:
184:
185: \begin{table}
186: \caption{Masses of the ground state light and heavy-light mesons (in MeV).}
187: \label{tab:mass}
188: \begin{ruledtabular}
189: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
190: Meson& $M^{\rm theor}$ & $M^{\rm exp}$ PDG \cite{pdg}\\
191: \hline
192: $\pi$& 154 &139.57\\
193: $\rho$ & 776 & 775.8(5)\\
194: $K$ & 482& 493.677(16)\\
195: $K^*$& 897& 891.66(26)\\
196: $\phi$& 1038& 1019.46(2)\\
197: $D$& 1872 & 1869.4(5)\\
198: $D^*$& 2009 & 2010.0(5)\\
199: $D_s$& 1967 & 1968.3(5)\\
200: $D_s^*$& 2112 & 2112.1(7)\\
201: $B$ & 5275 & 5279.0(5)\\
202: $B^*$ & 5326 & 5325.0(6)\\
203: $B_s$ & 5362 & 5369.6(2.4)\\
204: $B_s^*$ & 5414 & 5416.6(3.5)
205: \end{tabular}
206: \end{ruledtabular}
207: \end{table}
208:
209:
210:
211:
212:
213: The decay constants $f_P$ and $f_V$ of the pseudoscalar ($P$) and
214: vector ($V$) mesons parameterize the matrix elements of the weak
215: current $J^W_\mu=\bar q_1{\cal J}^W_\mu q_2=\bar q_1\gamma_\mu(1-\gamma_5)q_2$
216: between the corresponding meson and vacuum states. They are defined by
217: \begin{eqnarray}
218: \label{eq:dc}
219: \left<0|\bar q_1 \gamma^\mu\gamma_5 q_2|P({\bf K})\right>&=& i f_P
220: K^\mu,\\
221: \left<0|\bar q_1 \gamma^\mu q_2|V({\bf K},\varepsilon)\right>&=& f_V
222: M_V \varepsilon^\mu,
223: \end{eqnarray}
224: where ${\bf K}$ is the meson momentum, $\varepsilon^\mu$ and $M_V$ are
225: the polarization vector and mass of the vector meson. This matrix
226: element can be expressed through the two-particle Bethe-Salpeter wave
227: function $\Psi(M,p)$ in the quark loop integral (see Fig.~\ref{fig:diag})
228: \begin{equation}
229: \label{eq:bs}
230: \left<0| J^W_\mu |M({\bf K})\right>=\int\frac{d^4
231: p}{(2\pi)^4}
232: {\rm Tr}\left\{\gamma_\mu(1-\gamma_5)\Psi(M,p)\right\},
233: \end{equation}
234: where the trace is taken over spin indices. Integration
235: over $p^0$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:bs}) allows one to pass to the Fourier
236: transform of the single-time
237: wave function in the meson rest frame
238: \begin{equation}
239: \label{eq:stw}
240: \Psi(M,{\bf p})=\int\frac{dp^0}{2\pi}\Psi(M,p).
241: \end{equation}
242: This wave function contains both positive- and negative-energy
243: quark states. Since in the quasipotential approach we use the
244: wave function $\Psi_{M\, {\bf K}}({\bf p})$ projected onto the
245: positive-energy states, it is necessary to include additional terms
246: which account for the contributions of negative-energy intermediate
247: states. Within perturbation theory the weak matrix element
248: (\ref{eq:bs}) is schematically presented in
249: Fig.~\ref{fig:diag}. The first diagram in the right hand side
250: corresponds to the simple replacing of the wave function
251: (\ref{eq:stw}) $\Psi(M,{\bf p})$ by the projected one
252: $\Psi_{M\, {\bf K}}({\bf p})$.\footnote{The contributions with the exchange by the
253: effective interaction potential ${\mathcal V}$ which contain only
254: positive-energy intermediate states are automatically accounted for
255: by the wave function itself.} The second and third diagrams account for
256: negative-energy contributions to the first and second quark propagators,
257: respectively. The last diagram corresponds to negative-energy
258: contributions from both quark propagators.
259:
260: \begin{figure}%[htb]
261: \centering
262: \includegraphics[width=16cm]{diag1.eps}
263: \caption{Weak annihilation diagram of the meson. Solid and bold
264: lines denote the positive- and negative-energy part of the quark propagator,
265: respectively. Dashed lines represent the interaction operator
266: ${\mathcal V}$. Dashed ovals depict the projected wave function
267: $\Psi_{M\, {\bf K}}({\bf p})$.}
268: \label{fig:diag}
269: \end{figure}
270:
271: Thus in the quasipotential approach
272: this decay amplitude has the form
273: \begin{eqnarray}
274: \label{eq:qpd}
275: \left<0|J^W_\mu |M({\bf K})\right>&=&\sqrt{2M}\Biggl\{\int\frac{d^3
276: p}{(2\pi)^3} \bar u_1({\bf p}_1){\cal J}^W_\mu u_2({\bf p}_2)
277: \Psi_{M\, {\bf K}}({\bf
278: p})+\Biggl[\int\frac{d^3 p d^3 p'}{(2\pi)^6}\bar u_1({\bf p}_1)\Gamma_1\cr
279: &&\!\!\!\!\times
280: \frac{\Lambda^{(-)}_1({\bf p}_1')\gamma^0{\cal J}^W_\mu
281: \Lambda^{(+)}_2({\bf p}_2')\gamma^0}
282: {M+\epsilon_1(p')-\epsilon_2(p')}\Gamma_2 u_2({\bf p}_2)
283: \tilde V({\bf p}-{\bf p}')
284: \Psi_{M\, {\bf K}}({\bf p})
285: +(1\leftrightarrow 2)\Biggr]\cr
286: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!+\int\frac{d^3 p d^3 p'}{(2\pi)^6}\bar u_1({\bf p}_1)\Gamma_1
287: \frac{\Lambda^{(-)}_1({\bf p}_1')\gamma^0{\cal J}^W_\mu
288: \Lambda^{(-)}_2({\bf p}_2')\gamma^0}
289: {M+\epsilon_1(p')+\epsilon_2(p')}\Gamma_2 u_2({\bf p}_2)
290: \tilde V({\bf p}-{\bf p}')
291: \Psi_{M\, {\bf K}}({\bf
292: p})\Biggr\},\cr&&\!\!\!
293: \end{eqnarray}
294: where ${\bf p}_{1,2}^{(')}={\bf K}/2\pm {\bf p}^{(')}$;
295: $\epsilon(p)=\sqrt{{\bf p}^2+m^2}$; matrices
296: $\Gamma_{1,2}$ denote the Dirac structure of the interaction
297: potential (\ref{qpot}) for the first and second quark, respectively, and thus
298: $\Gamma_1\Gamma_2\tilde V({\bf p}-{\bf p}')={\mathcal V}({\bf p}-{\bf p}')$.
299: The factor $\sqrt{2M}$ follows
300: from the normalization of the quasipotential wave function. The
301: positive- and negative-energy projectors have standard definition
302: \[
303: \Lambda^{(\pm)}({\bf p})={\epsilon(p)\pm\bigl( m\gamma ^0+\gamma^0(
304: \bm{\gamma}{\bf p})\bigr) \over 2\epsilon (p)}.
305: \]
306: The ground-state wave function in the rest frame
307: of the decaying meson $\Psi_M({\bf p})\equiv\Psi_{M\, {\bf 0}}({\bf p})$
308: can be expressed through a product of radial $\Phi_M({\bf p})$,
309: spin $\chi_{ss'}$ and colour $\phi_{q_1q_2}$ wave functions
310: \begin{equation}
311: \label{eq:wff}
312: \Psi_M({\bf p})=\Phi_M({\bf p})\chi_{ss'}\phi_{q_1q_2}.
313: \end{equation}
314:
315: Now the decay constants can be presented in the following form
316: \begin{equation}
317: \label{eq:fpe}
318: f_{P,V}=f_{P,V}^{(1)}+f_{P,V}^{(2+3)}+f_{P,V}^{(4)},
319: \end{equation}
320: where the terms on the right hand side originate from the corresponding
321: diagrams in Fig.~\ref{fig:diag} and parameterize respective terms in
322: Eq.~(\ref{eq:qpd}). In the literature \cite{gi,efgdc} usually only
323: the first term is taken
324: into account, since it provides the nonrelativistic limit, while
325: other terms give only relativistic corrections and thus vanish in
326: this limit. Such approximation can be justified for mesons
327: containing only heavy quarks. However, as it will be shown below, for
328: mesons with light quarks, especially for light mesons, other terms
329: become equally important and their account is
330: crucial for getting the results in agreement with experimental data.
331:
332: The matrix element (\ref{eq:qpd}) and thus the decay constants can be
333: calculated in an arbitrary frame and from any component of the weak
334: current \cite{gmf}. Such calculation can
335: be most easily performed in the rest frame of the decaying meson from the
336: zero component of the current. The same results will be obtained from the
337: vector component; however, this calculation is more cumbersome, since
338: then the rest frame cannot be used and, thus, it is necessary to take
339: into account the relativistic transformation of the meson wave function
340: from the rest frame to the moving one with the momentum ${\bf K}$. It
341: is also possible to perform calculations in an explicitly covariant
342: way using methods proposed in \cite{efgms}.
343:
344: The resulting expressions for decay constants are given by
345: \begin{eqnarray}
346: \label{eq:fpv1}
347: f^{(1)}_{P,V}&=&\sqrt{\frac{12}{M}}\int \frac{d^3
348: p}{(2\pi)^3}\left(\frac{\epsilon_1(p)+m_1}{2\epsilon_1(p)}\right)^{1/2}
349: \left(\frac{\epsilon_2(p)+m_2}{2\epsilon_2(p)}\right)^{1/2}
350: \cr
351: &&\times \left\{ 1
352: +\lambda_{P,V}\,\frac{{\bf p}^2}{[\epsilon_1(p)+m_1][\epsilon_2(p)+m_2]}\right\}
353: \Phi_{P,V}({\bf p}),
354: \end{eqnarray}
355: \begin{eqnarray}
356: \label{eq:fpv3}
357: f^{(2+3)}_{P,V}&=&\sqrt{\frac{12}{M}}\int \frac{d^3
358: p}{(2\pi)^3}\left(\frac{\epsilon_1(p)+m_1}{2\epsilon_1(p)}\right)^{1/2}
359: \left(\frac{\epsilon_2(p)+m_2}{2\epsilon_2(p)}\right)^{1/2}\Biggl[
360: \frac{M-\epsilon_1(p)-\epsilon_2(p)}{M+\epsilon_1(p)-\epsilon_2(p)}\cr
361: &&\times
362: \frac{{\bf p}^2}{\epsilon_1(p)[\epsilon_1(p)+m_1]}
363: \left\{1+\lambda_{P,V}\frac{\epsilon_1(p)+m_1}{\epsilon_2(p)+m_2}\right\}
364: +(1\leftrightarrow 2)\Biggr]
365: \Phi_{P,V}({\bf p}),
366: \end{eqnarray}
367: \begin{eqnarray}
368: \label{eq:fpv4}
369: f^{(4)}_{P,V}&=&\sqrt{\frac{12}{M}}\int \frac{d^3
370: p}{(2\pi)^3}\left(\frac{\epsilon_1(p)+m_1}{2\epsilon_1(p)}\right)^{1/2}
371: \left(\frac{\epsilon_2(p)+m_2}{2\epsilon_2(p)}\right)^{1/2}
372: \frac{M-\epsilon_1(p)-\epsilon_2(p)}{M+\epsilon_1(p)+\epsilon_2(p)}\cr
373: &&\times
374: \left\{-\lambda_{P,V}-\frac{{\bf p}^2}{[\epsilon_1(p)+m_1]
375: [\epsilon_2(p)+m_2]}\right\} \cr
376: &&\times
377: \left[\frac{(1-\varepsilon)m_1^2m_2^2}{\epsilon_1^2(p)\epsilon_2^2(p)}+
378: \frac{{\bf p}^2}{[\epsilon_1(p)+m_1][\epsilon_2(p)+m_2]}\right]
379: \Phi_{P,V}({\bf p}),
380: \end{eqnarray}
381: with $\lambda_P=-1$ and $\lambda_V=1/3$. Here $\varepsilon$ is the
382: mixing coefficient of scalar and vector confining potentials
383: (\ref{vlin}) and the long-range anomalous chromomagnetic quark moment
384: $\kappa$ (\ref{kappa}) is put equal to $-1$. Note that $f_P^{(2+3)}$
385: vanishes for pseudoscalar mesons with equal quark masses, such as the pion.
386: The positive-energy contribution (\ref{eq:fpv1}) reproduces the previously known
387: expressions for the decay constants \cite{gi}. The negative-energy
388: contributions (\ref{eq:fpv3}) and (\ref{eq:fpv4}) are new and play a
389: significant role for light mesons.
390:
391: In the nonrelativistic limit ${\bf p}^2/m^2\to 0$ the expression
392: (\ref{eq:fpv1}) for decay constants gives the well-known formula
393: \begin{equation}
394: \label{eq:fnr}
395: f_{P,V}^{\rm NR}=
396: \sqrt{\frac{12}{M_{P,V}}}\left|\Psi_{P,V}(0)\right|,
397: \end{equation}
398: where $\Psi_{P,V}(0)$ is the meson wave function at the origin
399: $r=0$. All other contributions vanish in the nonrelativistic limit.
400:
401: \begin{table}
402: \caption{Different contributions to the pseudoscalar and vector
403: decay constants of light and heavy mesons (in MeV). The notations are taken
404: according to Eqs.~(\ref{eq:fpe}) and (\ref{eq:fnr}).}
405: \label{tab:dc}
406: \begin{ruledtabular}
407: \begin{tabular}{cccccc}
408: Constant& $f_M^{\rm NR}$&$f_M^{(1)}$& $f_M^{(2+3)}+f_M^{(4)}$
409: & $(f_M^{(2+3)}+f_M^{(4)})/f^{(1)}_M $&$f_M$ \\
410: \hline
411: $f_\pi$ & 1290 &515 & $-391$ &$-76\%$ &124 \\
412: $f_\rho$ & 490 & 402 & $-183$&$-46\%$ & 219 \\
413: $f_K$ & 783 & 353 & $-198$& $-56\%$ & 155 \\
414: $f_{K^*}$ & 508 & 410 & $-174$&$-42\%$ & 236\\
415: $f_\phi$ & 511 & 415 &$-170$&$-41\%$ &245 \\
416: $f_D$ & 376 & 275 &$-41$& $-15\%$ & 234\\
417: $f_{D^*}$ & 391 & 334 & $-24$ & $-7\%$ & 310\\
418: $f_{D_s}$ & 436 & 306 & $-38$ & $-12\%$ & 268\\
419: $f_{D_s^*}$ & 447 & 367 & $-52$ & $-14\%$ & 315\\
420: $f_B$ & 259 & 210 & $-21$ & $-10\%$ & 189\\
421: $f_{B^*}$ & 280 & 235 & $-16$ & $-7\%$ & 219\\
422: $f_{B_s}$ & 300 & 238 & $-20$ & $-8\%$ & 218\\
423: $f_{B_s^*}$ & 316 & 264 & $-13$ & $-5\%$ & 251
424: \end{tabular}
425: \end{ruledtabular}
426:
427: \end{table}
428:
429: \begin{table}
430: \caption{Pseudoscalar and vector decay constants of light mesons (in
431: MeV).}
432: \label{tab:dce}
433: \begin{ruledtabular}
434: \begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
435: Constant&this work&\cite{gi} & \cite{mr} &\cite{k} &\cite{hjd}
436: &Lattice \cite{ak} &Lattice \cite{milc}& Experiment \cite{pdg}\\
437: \hline
438: $f_\pi$ & 124& 180 & 131&219&138&$126.6(6.4)$ &$129.5(3.6)$ &$130.70(10)(36)$\\
439: $f_K$ & 155& 232& 155& 238&160&$152.0(6.1)$&$156.6(3.7)$ & $159.80(1.4)(44)$\\
440: $f_\rho$ & 219&220&207& &238&$239.4(7.3)$& &
441: $\left\{\begin{array}{c}220(2)^*\cr 209(4)^{**}\end{array}\right.$\\
442: $f_{K^*}$ & 236& 267& 241& &241&$255.5(6.5)$& & $217(5)^\dag$\\
443: $f_\phi$ &245&336&259&&&$270.8(6.5)$& & $229(3)^\ddag$
444: \end{tabular}
445: \end{ruledtabular}
446: \begin{flushleft}
447: ${}^*$ derived from the experimental value for $\Gamma_{\rho^0\to
448: e^+e^-}$.\\
449: ${}^{**}$ derived from the experimental value for $\Gamma_{\tau\to\rho\nu_\tau}$.\\
450: ${}^\dag$ derived from the experimental value for
451: $\Gamma_{\tau\to K^*\nu_\tau}$.\\
452: ${}^\ddag$ derived from the experimental value for $\Gamma_{\phi\to
453: e^+e^-}$.
454: \end{flushleft}
455:
456: \end{table}
457:
458:
459:
460:
461:
462: In Table~\ref{tab:dc} we present our predictions for the
463: light and heavy-light meson decay constants calculated using the meson
464: wave functions which were obtained as the numerical solutions of the
465: quasipotential equation.\footnote{We roughly estimate the uncertainties in our
466: calculations to be about ten MeV for light mesons and of a several
467: MeV for heavy-light mesons.} The values~\footnote{For the
468: evaluation of $f_M^{\rm NR}$ the relativistic wave functions were
469: used. Thus the difference of the
470: pseudoscalar and vector decay constants in this limit results from the
471: difference of the corresponding relativistic wave functions.} of
472: $f_M^{\rm NR}$, obtained from the nonrelativistic expression
473: (\ref{eq:fnr}), as well as the values of different contributions
474: $f_M^{(1,2,3,4)}$ (\ref{eq:fpv1})--(\ref{eq:fpv4})
475: and the complete relativistic values of $f_M$ (\ref{eq:fpe}) are given. In
476: Table~\ref{tab:dce} we compare our results~\footnote{In our model
477: $\rho$ and $\omega$ mesons are degenerate, therefore their decay
478: constants are equal. The experimental value
479: for the decay constant of the $\omega$ meson, derived from
480: $\Gamma_{\omega\to e^+e^-}$ \cite{pdg}, is $f_\omega=195(3)$~MeV.}
481: for the decay constants $f_M$ of light mesons
482: with other quark model predictions \cite{gi,mr,k,hjd}, recent values from
483: two- \cite{ak} and three-flavour \cite{milc} lattice QCD and
484: available experimental data \cite{pdg}. It is clearly seen that the
485: nonrelativistic predictions are significantly overestimating all
486: decay constants, especially for the pion (almost by a factor of 10). The
487: partial account of relativistic corrections by keeping in
488: Eq.~(\ref{eq:fpe}) only the first term $f_M^{(1)}$
489: (\ref{eq:fpv1}), which is usually used for semirelativistic
490: calculations, does not substantially improve the situation. The
491: disagreement is still large. This is connected with the anomalously
492: small masses of light pseudoscalar mesons exhibiting their chiral
493: nature. In the semirelativistic quark model \cite{gi} the pseudoscalar
494: meson mass is replaced by the so-called mock mass $\tilde M_P$, which is equal to
495: the mean total energy of free quarks in a meson, and with our wave
496: functions: $\tilde
497: M_\pi=2\langle\epsilon_q(p)\rangle\approx 1070$~MeV ($\sim 8 M_\pi$)
498: and $\tilde
499: M_K=\langle\epsilon_q(p)\rangle+\langle\epsilon_s(p)\rangle\approx
500: 1232$~MeV ($\sim 2.5 M_K$). Such replacement yields values of $f_P^{(1)}$
501: which are still $\approx 1.4$ times larger than experimental ones
502: (cf. \cite{gi}). As we see from Table~\ref{tab:dc},
503: it is not justified to neglect contributions of
504: the negative energy intermediate states for light meson decay
505: constants. Indeed, the values of $f_M^{(2+3)}+f_M^{(4)}$ are large and
506: negative (reaching $-76\%$ of $f_\pi^{(1)}$ for the pion)
507: thus compensating the overestimation of decay constants by
508: the positive-energy contribution $f_M^{(1)}$. This is the consequence
509: of the smallness of the
510: light pseudoscalar meson masses compared to the energies of their
511: constituents. The negative-energy contributions (\ref{eq:fpv3}),
512: (\ref{eq:fpv4}) are proportional to the ratio of the meson binding
513: energy $M-\epsilon_1(p)-\epsilon_2(p)$ to its mass and quark energies.
514: For mesons with
515: heavy quarks this factor is small and leads to the suppression of negative-energy
516: contributions. This results in the dominance of the positive-energy
517: term $f_M^{(1)}$. Indeed the
518: negative-energy terms for heavy-light $D$ and $B$ mesons give
519: $10-15$\% contributions (see Table~\ref{tab:dc}) which have the
520: typical magnitude of the heavy quark corrections. This explains the
521: closeness of the obtained values of constants to our previous results
522: \cite{efgdc}.
523: On the other hand, for light mesons,
524: especially for the pion and kaon, the binding energies are not small on the
525: meson mass and quark energy scales and, thus, such factor gives no
526: suppression. The complete relativistic expression (\ref{eq:fpe}) for decay
527: constants $f_M$ brings theoretical predictions for
528: light mesons in good
529: agreement with available experimental data.
530:
531: The comparison of our values of the decay constants of light mesons
532: with other predictions in
533: Table~\ref{tab:dce} indicate that they are competitive even with the results of
534: more sophisticated approaches (e.g. \cite{mr}) which are based on the
535: Dyson-Schwinger and Bethe-Salpeter equations. On the other hand, our
536: model is more selfconsistent than some other approaches \cite{hjd,gi}.
537: We calculate the meson wave functions by solving the
538: quasipotential equation in contrast to the models based on the
539: relativistic Hamilton dynamics \cite{hjd} where various ad hoc
540: wave function parameterizations are employed.
541:
542:
543: \begin{table}
544: \caption{Pseudoscalar and vector decay constants of heavy mesons (in
545: MeV).}
546: \label{tab:dchm}
547: \begin{ruledtabular}
548: \begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
549: Constant&\multicolumn{2}{l}{\underline{\hspace{.4cm}Quark models\hspace{.4cm}}}&
550: \multicolumn{2}{l}{\underline{\hspace{1.1cm}Lattice QCD\hspace{1.1cm}}} &
551: \multicolumn{3}{l}{\underline{\hspace{.8cm}QCD sum
552: rules\hspace{.8cm}}}& \underline{\hspace{.3cm}Experiment\hspace{.3cm}}\\
553:
554: &this work& \cite{ckwn} &\cite{ak} &
555: \cite{ml,hpqcd} &\cite{nar}& \cite{ps}& \cite{jl} & \cite{pdg,cleo}\\
556: \hline
557: $f_D$ & 234& 230(25) & 225(14)(40)&201(3)(17)&203(20)& 195(20)&
558: &$222.6(16.7)(^{2.8}_{3.4})$ \\
559: $f_{D_s}$ & 268& 248(27)& 267(13)(48)& 249(3)(16)&235(24)& &
560: &266(32) \\
561: $f_{D_s}/f_D$ & 1.15&1.08(1)& &1.24(1)(7) &1.15(4)& & & \\
562: $f_B$ & 189& 196(29)& 208(10)(29)& 216(9)(19)(6) &203(23)& 206(20)&210(19)& \\
563: $f_{B_s}$ &218 &216(32)&250(10)(35)& 259(32)& 236(30)& &244(21)& \\
564: $f_{B_s}/f_B$ & 1.15 & 1.10(1)& & 1.20(3)(1)&1.16(4)& &1.16&
565: \end{tabular}
566: \end{ruledtabular}
567:
568: \end{table}
569:
570: In Table~\ref{tab:dchm} we confront our results for pseudoscalar
571: decay constants of the heavy-light mesons as well as their ratios with the
572: recent predictions based on the Salpeter equation \cite{ckwn},
573: values from the unquenched two- \cite{ak} and three-flavour
574: \cite{ml,hpqcd} lattice QCD,\footnote{The recent quenched lattice QCD
575: values \cite{chllc}
576: for the pseudoscalar decay constants are $f_K=152(6)(10)$ MeV, $f_D=235(8)(14)$ MeV
577: and $f_{D_s}=266(10)(18)$ MeV. } QCD sum rules \cite{nar,ps,jl} and available
578: experimental data \cite{pdg}. Reliable experimental data, up till recently,
579: existed only for $f_{D_s}$, which was measured by several experimental
580: collaborations (ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, Beatrice, CLEO, E653, WA75,
581: BES) both in the $D_s\to\mu\nu$ and the $D_s\to\tau\nu$ decay
582: channels. At present, experimental errors are still rather large for this
583: constant. Very recently, the CLEO Collaboration \cite{cleo} published a
584: relatively precise value for the decay constant $f_D$ measured in
585: $D\to\mu\nu$ decay. We see from Table~\ref{tab:dchm} that there is a
586: good (within error bars) agreement between all presented theoretical
587: predictions as well as with available experimental data.
588:
589:
590:
591:
592:
593:
594: In summary, the weak decay constants of pseudoscalar and vector light
595: and heavy-light mesons were investigated with the special emphasize on the
596: role of relativistic effects. For our calculations we used the
597: meson wave functions which were obtained by the numerical solution of
598: the quasipotential equation with the nonperturbative treatment of all
599: spin-dependent and spin-independent relativistic contributions to the
600: quark interaction potential. It was argued that both positive-
601: and negative-energy
602: parts of the quark propagators in the weak annihilation loop should be
603: taken into account. The positive-energy contributions, which are
604: usually considered in the semirelativistic quark models,
605: significantly overestimate the decay constants of light
606: mesons. We showed that the negative-energy contributions to the light
607: meson decay constants are large and negative. Their account is
608: necessary to bring theoretical predictions in agreement
609: with experimental data. On the other hand, these negative-energy
610: contributions are considerably smaller for decay constants of
611: heavy-light mesons and have the order of magnitude of the lowest correction in
612: the heavy quark expansion. The consistent inclusion of relativistic
613: effects coming both from the quark propagators and the meson wave
614: functions considerably improve the accuracy and reliability of the
615: obtained predictions.
616:
617:
618:
619:
620:
621: The authors are grateful to A. Ali Khan, M. M\"uller-Preussker and
622: V. Savrin for support and useful discussions. Two of us
623: (R.N.F. and V.O.G.) were supported in part by the {\it Deutsche
624: Forschungsgemeinschaft} under contract Eb 139/2-3 and by the {\it Russian
625: Foundation for Basic Research} under Grant No.05-02-16243.
626:
627:
628:
629: \begin{thebibliography}{00}
630: \bibitem{akr} For a recent review see A. Ali Khan,
631: hep-lat/0507031.
632: \bibitem{ak} A. Ali Khan et al., Phys. Rev. D {\bf 65}, 054505 (2002);
633: {\bf 67}, 059901(E) (2003); Phys. Rev. D {\bf 64}, 054504 (2001).
634: \bibitem{milc} C. Aubin et al., Phys. Rev. D {\bf
635: 70}, 114501 (2004); C.T.H. Davies et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf
636: 92}, 022001 (2004).
637: \bibitem{ml} C. Aubin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 95}, 122002
638: (2005).
639: \bibitem{hpqcd} A. Gray et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 95}, 212001
640: (2005).
641: \bibitem{chllc} T.W. Chiu et al., Phys. Lett. B {\bf 624}, 31 (2005).
642: \bibitem{nar} S. Narison, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 520}, 115 (2001).
643: \bibitem{ps} A.A. Penin and M. Steinhauser, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 65},
644: 054006 (2002).
645: \bibitem{jl} M. Jamin and B.O. Lange, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 65},
646: 056005 (2002).
647:
648: \bibitem{gi} S. Godfrey and N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 32}, 189
649: (1985); S. Godfrey, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 33}, 1391 (1986).
650: \bibitem{mr} P. Maris and C.D. Roberts, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E {\bf
651: 12}, 297 (2003); P. Maris and P.C. Tandy, Phys. Rev. C {\bf
652: 60}, 055214 (1999); Phys. Rev. C {\bf 62}, 055204
653: (2000).
654: \bibitem{k} M. Koll et al., Eur. Phys. J. A {\bf 9}, 73 (2000).
655: \bibitem{gmf} V.O. Galkin, A.Yu. Mishurov and R.N. Faustov,
656: Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. {\bf 53}, 1026 (1991) [Yad. Fiz. {\bf 53}, 1676 (1991)].
657: \bibitem{efgdc} D. Ebert, R.N. Faustov and V.O. Galkin,
658: Mod. Phys. Lett. A {\bf 17}, 803 (2002).
659: \bibitem{ckwn} G. Cveti\v c, C.S. Kim, G.-L. Wang and W. Namgung,
660: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 596}, 84 (2004).
661: \bibitem{hjd} J. He, B. Julia-Diaz and Y. Dong, Eur. Phys. J A {\bf
662: 24}, 411 (2005).
663: \bibitem{pdg} Particle Data Group, S. Eidelman et al.,
664: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 592}, 1 (2004).
665: \bibitem{cleo} CLEO Collaboration, M. Artuso et al.,
666: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 95}, 251801 (2005).
667: \bibitem{lmm} D. Ebert, R.N. Faustov and V.O. Galkin,
668: Mod. Phys. Lett. A {\bf 20}, 1887 (2005); hep-ph/0511029.
669:
670:
671: \bibitem{efg} D. Ebert, R.N. Faustov and V.O. Galkin,
672: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 67}, 014027 (2003); Phys. Rev. D {\bf 72}, 034026 (2005).
673: \bibitem{egf} D. Ebert, V.O. Galkin and R.N. Faustov,
674: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 57}, 5663 (1998); {\bf 59}, 019902(E) (1999).
675: \bibitem{efgms} D. Ebert, R.N. Faustov, V.O. Galkin and A.P. Martynenko,
676: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 70}, 014018 (2004); Phys. Atom. Nucl. {\bf 68},
677: 784 (2005) [Yad. Fiz. {\bf 68}, 817 (2005)].
678:
679:
680:
681:
682:
683:
684: \end{thebibliography}
685:
686:
687:
688: \end{document}