1:
2: \documentclass[11pt]{article}
3:
4: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.4}
5: %\baselineskip=12pt
6: %\textwidth 12.5cm \textheight 19.2cm
7: %\evensidemargin=1.5cm \oddsidemargin=1.5cm
8: %\topmargin=4.9cm
9:
10: \usepackage{amsmath, amssymb}
11: \usepackage{epic,eepic}
12:
13: \begin{document}
14:
15: \title{Chromogravity - An Effective Diff(4,R) Gauge for the IR region of
16: QCD}
17:
18: \author{Djordje \v Sija\v cki \\
19: Institute of Physics, P.O. Box 57, 11001 Belgrade, Yugoslavia}
20:
21: \date{}
22:
23: \maketitle
24:
25: \begin{abstract}
26: Previous work on the IR regime approximation of QCD in which the dominant
27: contribution comes from a dressed two-gluon effective metric-like field
28: $G_{\mu\nu} = g_{ab} A^{a}_{\mu} A^{b}_{\nu}$ ($g_{ab}$ a color $SU(3)$
29: metric) is reviewed. The QCD gauge is approximated by effective
30: "chromodiffeomorphisms", i.e. by a gauge theory based on a
31: pseudo-diffeomorphisms group. The second-quantized $G_{\mu\nu}$ field,
32: together with the Lorentz generators close on the $\overline{SL}(4,R)$
33: algebra. This algebra represents a spectrum generating algebra for the
34: set of hadron states of a given flavor - hadronic "manifields"
35: transforming w.r.t. $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ (infinite-dimensional) unitary
36: irreducible representations. The equations of motion for the effective
37: pseudo-gravity are derived from a quadratic action describing Riemannian
38: pseudo-gravity in the presence of shear ($\overline{SL}(4,R)$ covariant)
39: hadronic matter currents. These equations yield $p^{-4}$ propagators,
40: i.e. a linearly rising confining potential $H(r) \sim r$, as well as
41: linear $J \sim m^{2}$ Regge trajectories. The $\overline{SL}(4,R)$
42: symmetry based dynamical theory for the QCD IR region is successfully
43: applied to hadron resonances. The pseudo-gravity potential reaches over
44: to Nuclear Physics, where its $J^{P} = 2^{+},\ 0^{+}$ quanta provide for
45: the ground state excitations of the Arima-Iachello Interacting Boson
46: Model.
47: \end{abstract}
48:
49: \newpage
50:
51:
52: \section{Introduction}
53:
54:
55: One of the main challenges in Particle Physics is the understanding
56: and/or classification of quite a large number of presently known hadronic
57: resonances. Here we are faced with an intriguing situation: In the
58: "horizontal" direction one has flavor symmetries and rather powerful
59: quantitative techniques with practically none understanding of the
60: corresponding underlying fundamental interaction. As for the "vertical"
61: direction (fixed flavor content), the basic interaction is given by the
62: presently widely accepted Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) theory, however
63: the non-perturbative features of QCD have made it difficult to apply the
64: theory exactly. Quite a number of approaches to deal with this region
65: have been proposed so far with different degree of success. We believe
66: that the merits of the approach described in this paper are both the fact
67: that our starting point is QCD itself and that the predictions fit very
68: well with experiment.
69:
70: If the hadron lowest ground states are colorless (our assumption) and in
71: the approximation of an external QCD potential, the hadron spectrum above
72: these levels will be generated by color-singlet quanta, whether made of
73: dressed two-gluon configurations, three-gluons, \dots . Every possible
74: configuration will appear. No matter what the mechanism responsible for a
75: given flavor state, the next vibrational, rotational or pulsed excitation
76: corresponds to the "addition" of one such collective color-singlet
77: multigluon quantum superposition. In the fully relativistic QCD theory,
78: these contributions have to come from summations of appropriate Feynman
79: diagrams, in which dressed $n$-gluon configurations are exchanged. We
80: rearrange the sum by lumping together contributions from $n$-gluon
81: irreducible parts, $n=2, 3, ..., \infty$ and with the same Lorentz
82: quantum numbers. The simplest such system will have the quantum numbers
83: of di-gluon, i.e. $n=2$. The color singlet external field can thus be
84: constructed from the QCD gluon field as a sum ($g_{ab}$ is the color-$SU(3)$
85: metric, $d_{abc}$ are the totally symmetric $8\otimes 8\otimes
86: 8\rightarrow 1$ coefficients)
87: \begin{equation}
88: g_{ab}A^{a}_{\mu}A^{b}_{\nu} \oplus
89: d_{abc}A^{a}_{\mu}A^{b}_{\nu}A^{c}_{\sigma} \oplus \cdots .
90: \end{equation}
91: In the above, $A^{a}_{\mu}$ is the dressed gluon field.
92:
93:
94: \section{Chromometric $G_{\mu\nu}$}
95:
96:
97: We suggest that the main feature of hadron excitations is due to a
98: component of QCD representing the exchange of a two-gluon effective
99: gravity-like "chromo-metric" field ($A^{a}_{\mu}(x)$ the properly
100: normalized gluon) \cite{chromo}:
101: \begin{equation}
102: G_{\mu\nu}(x) = g_{ab} A^{a}_{\mu}A^{b}_{\nu} .
103: \end{equation}
104:
105: It will be useful for the applications to separate the "flat connection"
106: $N^{a}_{\mu}$, i.e. the zero-mode of the field. Writing for the curvature
107: or field strength
108: \begin{equation}
109: F^{a}_{\mu\nu} = \partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\nu} -
110: \partial_{\nu}A^{a}_{\mu} - if^{a}_{\ \ bc}A^{b}_{\mu}A^{c}_{\nu},
111: \end{equation}
112: we define
113: \begin{equation}
114: A^{a}_{\mu} = N^{a}_{\mu} + B^{a}_{\mu}, \quad
115: \partial_{\mu}N^{a}_{\nu} - \partial_{\nu}N^{a}_{\mu} =
116: if^{a}_{bc}N^{b}_{\mu}N^{c}_{\nu},
117: \end{equation}
118: \noindent where
119: $N^{a}_{\mu}$ is the constant component, yielding a vanishing field
120: strength.
121:
122: Such a vacuum solution might be of the instanton type, for instance.
123: Consider, e.g. the first nontrivial class, with Pontryagin index $n=0$.
124: Expand around this classical configuration, working, as always for
125: instantons, in a Euclidean metric (i.e. a tunneling solution in
126: Minkowski spacetime). At large distances the instanton field is required
127: to approach a constant value
128: \begin{equation}
129: g_{ab}\ N^a_\mu\ \partial_\nu\epsilon^b=\partial_\nu(g_{ab}\ N^a_\mu
130: \ \epsilon^b)
131: \end{equation}
132: with the $B^a_\mu (x)$ field representing a fluctuation around the
133: constant value, vanishing at large distances. One can construct the
134: constant vacuum solution by mapping $SU(3)\to S^4$, namely directly
135: onto the complete Euclidean manifold, compactified by the addition of
136: a point at infinity.
137:
138: $G_{\mu\nu}$ acts as a "pseudo-metric" field, (passively)
139: gauging effective "pseudo-diffeomorphisms", just as is done by the
140: physical Einstein metric field for the "true" diffeomorphisms of the
141: covariance group.
142:
143: The variation of the chromo-metric under color-$SU(3)$, due to
144: \begin{equation}
145: {\delta}_{\epsilon} A^{a}_{\mu} = {\partial}_{\mu}{\epsilon}^{a} +
146: A^{b}_{\mu} ({\lambda}_{b})^{a}_{c} {\epsilon}^{c},
147: \end{equation}
148: (we use the adjoint representation
149: $\{\lambda_b\}^{a}_{c} = -if_{b\ c}^{a} = if^{a}_{bc}$) reads
150: \begin{eqnarray*}
151: {\delta}_{\epsilon}G_{\mu\nu} &=& {\delta}_{\epsilon} \{ g_{ab}
152: (N^{a}_{\mu} + B^{a}_{\mu}) (N^{b}_{\nu} + B^{b}_{\nu}) \} \\
153: &=& g_{ab}
154: ({\partial}_{\mu}{\epsilon}^{a} N^{b}_{\nu} + N^{a}_{\mu}{\partial}_{\nu}
155: {\epsilon}^{b} + {\partial}_{\mu}{\epsilon}^{a} B^{b}_{\nu} +
156: B^{a}_{\mu}{\partial}_{\nu}{\epsilon}^{b}) \\
157: &&+ ig_{ab} \left\{ f^a_{cd} A^c_\mu \epsilon^d A^b_\nu
158: + f^b_{cd} A^a_\mu A^c_\nu \epsilon^d \right\} .
159: \end{eqnarray*}
160:
161: The last bracket vanishes, since it represents the homogeneous $SU(3)$
162: transformation of the $SU(3)$ scalar expression, i.e.
163: \begin{equation*}
164: if_{bcd}\ (A^b_\mu\ A^c_\nu + A^c_\mu\ A^b_\nu)\ \epsilon^d
165: \end{equation*}
166: (or, more technically, due to the total antisymmetry of $f_{abc}$ in a
167: compact group).
168:
169:
170: We note that at the IR region distances, any Gauss theorem
171: field-fluxes will only involve the $N^a_\mu$ constant component,
172: whereas the $B^a_\mu(x)$ ``fluctuation"
173: will not contribute. As a result, when integrating by parts the terms
174: in $B^a_\mu,\ B^b_\nu$ we get
175: \begin{equation*}
176: g_{ab}\ (\epsilon^a\ \partial_\mu B^b_\nu+\partial_\nu B^a_\mu\ \epsilon^b)
177: \end{equation*}
178: an expression whose Fourier transform vanishes for $k \to 0$, i.e. in the
179: infrared sector. A generalized definition of
180: this ``IR limit" will be addressed below.
181:
182: The terms involving the constant $N^{a}_{\mu}$, $N^{b}_{\nu}$ can be
183: rewritten in terms of effective pseudo-diffeomorphisms, defined by
184: \begin{equation}
185: {\xi}_{\mu} \equiv g_{ab} {\epsilon}^{a} N^{b}_{\mu}, \quad
186: {\delta}_{\epsilon}G_{\mu\nu} = {\partial}_{\mu}{\xi}_{\nu} +
187: {\partial}_{\nu}{\xi}_{\mu}.
188: \end{equation}
189:
190: {\it Thus, the local $SU(3)$ color gauge variations contain a subsystem
191: ensuring that the $G_{\mu\nu}$ di-gluon indeed act as a "pseudo-metric"
192: field, precisely emulating gravity}.
193:
194: The definition of our "IR limit" based on the vanishing of the
195: $4$-momenta of the `fluctuating fields' $B^{a}_{\mu}$ -- after an
196: integration by parts in which only the constant fields $N^{a}_{\mu}$
197: contribute to the surface terms -- will be extended so as to include
198: similar terms with vanishing momenta in all many-gluon zero-color
199: exchanges. This can be taken as an operational definition, sufficient for
200: our general purpose. To gain some additional insight, however, we remind
201: the reader that such an IR approximation of QCD can also be thought of as
202: the first step, the "zeroth approximation", of a {\it strong coupling}
203: regime -- in terms of a "small parameter" representing the number of
204: "hard", or nonsoft, virtual quanta held in the evaluation of any physical
205: quantity. We can write a generic IR state, carrying $4$-momentum $k$, as
206: follows:
207: \begin{equation}
208: \vert \phi_{IR},\ k\rangle = \sum_{m=1}^{\infty}
209: f_{m}(k_{1},k_{2},\dots ,k_{m})
210: \delta_{k,k_{1}+k_{2}+\cdots +k_{m}}
211: \vert k_{1}k_{2}\dots k_{m} \rangle
212: \end{equation}
213: where $\vert k_{1}k_{2}\dots k_{m} \rangle$ represents a state of $m$
214: soft gluons ($k_{i} \approx 0,\ i=1,2,\dots m$). Integrating by parts
215: (with surface terms again appearing only for the constant parts), the
216: matrix elements of the terms in $B^{a}_{\mu}$, $B^{b}_{\nu}$ become in
217: this IR approximation
218: \begin{equation*}
219: \langle \phi_{IR}^{\prime}, k^{\prime}\vert
220: g_{ab} (\epsilon^{a} \partial_{\mu} B^{b}_{\nu} +
221: \partial_{\nu} B^{a}_{\mu} \epsilon^{b})
222: \vert \phi_{IR},\ k\rangle ,
223: \end{equation*}
224: an expression that is proportional to the soft $1$-gluon momentum, and
225: that vanishes for $k\rightarrow 0$, i.e., in the infrared sector. As a
226: result, when changing over to the $\xi_{\mu}$ variable of and
227: reidentifying $\delta_{\xi}$ as a variation under a formal $R^{4}$
228: diffeomorphism, we get ${\delta}_{\epsilon}G_{\mu\nu} =
229: {\partial}_{\mu}{\xi}_{\nu} + {\partial}_{\nu}{\xi}_{\mu}$. For the
230: sake of completeness, we note that in general one has to consider
231: expressions of the following form
232: \begin{equation*}
233: \langle \phi_{IR}^{\prime}, k^{\prime}\vert
234: O(B^{a}_{\mu}, \partial_{\nu}B^{a}_{\mu}) \delta_{\epsilon} G_{\mu\nu}
235: \vert \phi_{IR},\ k\rangle .
236: \end{equation*}
237: We evaluate such expressions, in this IR approximation, by inserting a
238: complete set of states, and retaining only the {\it soft} virtual
239: quanta. It is explained in Ref. \cite{Fried} that by making use of the
240: Fradkin representation \cite{Fradkin} for relevant Green's functions
241: one has a continuous family of "soft", or IR approximations, which
242: maintain gauge invariance. Thus, one finds a consistent
243: gauge-invariant (strong coupling) IR approximation with dressed gluon
244: propagators which incorporate the iteration of all relevant quark
245: bubbles, each carrying all possible internal, soft-gluon lines.
246:
247: The consistency of this IR approximation requires one to consider only
248: those QCD variations that connect IR gluon configurations {\it
249: mutually}. Let us consider the expression for the $B=A-N$ variation, i.e.
250: $\delta_{\epsilon} A^{a}_{\mu} = \partial_{\mu}\epsilon^{a} + i
251: f^{a}_{\ bc} A^{b}_{\mu} \epsilon^{c}$
252: The left hand side of this expression is a difference between two soft
253: gluons, implying that the IR matrix elements of its partial derivative
254: are soft. Thus, we find the following "IR constraint" on the QCD gauge
255: parameters:
256: \begin{equation}
257: \langle \phi_{IR}^{\prime}, k^{\prime}\vert
258: \partial_{\rho} \partial_{\mu} \epsilon^{a} +
259: i f^{a}_{\ bc} B^{b}_{\mu} \partial_{\rho} \epsilon^{c}
260: \vert \phi_{IR},\ k\rangle
261: \approx 0 .
262: \end{equation}
263:
264:
265: \section{$Diff(4,R)$ Structure -- $n$-gluon fields}
266:
267:
268: Let us now consider the multi-gluon colorless configurations \cite{diff}.
269: The color-singlet $n$-gluon field operator has the following form
270: \begin{equation}
271: G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}} = d^{(n)}_{a_{1}a_{2}\cdots a_{n}}
272: A^{a_{1}}_{\mu_{1}}A^{a_{2}}_{\mu_{2}} \cdots A^{a_{n}}_{\mu_{n}}
273: \end{equation}
274: where
275: \begin{eqnarray*}
276: &&d^{(2)}_{a_{1}a_{2}} = g_{a_{1}a_{2}}, \\ &&d^{(3)}_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}} =
277: d_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}}, \\ &&d^{(n)}_{a_{1}a_{2}\cdots a_{n}} =
278: d_{a_{1}a_{2}b_{1}} g^{b_{1}c_{1}} d_{c_{1}b_{2}a_{3}} \cdots \\ &&\hskip
279: 50pt \times g^{b_{n-4}c_{n-4}} d_{c_{n-4}b_{n-3}a_{n-2}}
280: g^{b_{n-3}c_{n-3}} d_{c_{n-3}a_{n-1}a_{n}},\quad n>3,
281: \end{eqnarray*}
282: $A^{a}_{\mu}$ is the dressed gluon field, $g_{a_{1}a_{2}}$ is the $SU(3)$
283: Cartan metric, and $d_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}}$ is the $SU(3)$ totally symmetric
284: $8\times 8\times 8 \rightarrow 1$ tensor.
285:
286: But taking Fourier transforms -- i.e. the matrix elements for these gluon
287: fluctuations -- we find that {\it these terms are precisely those that
288: vanish in our definition of an IR region}. The terms involving the
289: constant connections $N^{a_{i}}_{\mu_{i}}$, $i=1,2,\dots n$ can be
290: rewritten in terms of effective pseudo-diffeomorphisms,
291:
292: The QCD variation, in the IR region can be rewritten in terms of
293: effective pseudo-diffeomorphisms,
294: \begin{equation}
295: \delta_{\epsilon} G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}} =
296: \partial_{\{ \mu_{1}} \xi^{(n-1)}_{\mu_{2}\mu_{3}\cdots\mu_{n}\} }
297: \equiv \delta_{\xi} G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}},
298: \end{equation}
299: where $\{ \mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}\}$ denotes symmetrization of
300: indices,
301: \begin{equation}
302: \xi^{(n-1)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n-1}} \equiv
303: d^{(n)}_{a_{1}a_{2}\cdots a_{n}} N^{a_{1}}_{\mu_{1}}N^{a_{2}}_{\mu_{2}}
304: \cdots N^{a_{n-1}}_{\mu_{n-1}}\epsilon^{a_{n}}
305: \end{equation}
306: while $N^{a_{i}}_{\mu_{i}}$, $i=1,2,\dots n$, being the constant
307: connections.
308:
309: A subsequent application of two $SU(3)$-induced variations, i.e. the
310: commutator of two such chromo-diffeomorphic variations
311: \begin{equation}
312: [\delta_{\epsilon_{1}},\ \delta_{\epsilon_{2}}]
313: G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}} = \delta_{\epsilon_{3}}
314: G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}},
315: \end{equation}
316: i.e.
317: \begin{equation}
318: [\delta_{\xi_{1}},\ \delta_{\xi_{2}}]
319: G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}} = \delta_{\xi_{3}}
320: G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}},
321: \end{equation}
322: where
323: \begin{equation}
324: \xi_{3\mu} = (\partial_\nu\xi_{1\mu})\ \xi_2^\nu +
325: (\partial_\mu\xi_{1\nu})\ \xi_2^\nu - (\partial_\nu\xi_{2\mu})\
326: \xi_1^\nu - (\partial_\mu\xi_{2\nu})\ \xi_1^\nu
327: \end{equation}
328: indeed closes on the covariance group's commutation relations.
329: Thus, one has an infinitesimal nonlinear realization of the $Diff(4,R)$
330: group in the space of fields $\Big\{
331: G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}}\ \Big\vert \ n=2,3,\dots \Big\}$.
332:
333:
334: \section{$Diff(4,R)$ Structure -- $L^{(m)}$ Operators Algebra}
335:
336:
337: Let us consider an $\infty$-dimensional vector space over the field
338: operators \break\hfill
339: $\Big\{ G^{(n)} \ \Big\vert\ n=2,3,\dots \Big\}$,
340: i.e.,
341: \begin{equation}
342: V(G^{(2)},G^{(3)},\dots )\ =\ V( G^{(2)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}},\
343: G^{(3)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\mu_{3}},\dots ).
344: \end{equation}
345: We can now define an infinite set of field-dependent operators \break\hfill
346: $\Big\{ L^{(m)}\ \Big\vert\ m=0,1,2,\dots \Big\}$ as follows
347:
348: \begin{eqnarray*}
349: &&L^{(0)\rho}_{\nu_{1}}\ =\ d^{(2)}_{a_{1}a_{2}}A^{a_{1}}_{\nu_{1}}
350: \frac{\delta}{\delta (g_{a_{2}b}A^{b}_{\rho})}\ \equiv\ g_{a_{1}a_{2}}
351: A^{a_{1}}_{\nu_{1}} \frac{\delta}{\delta (g_{a_{2}b}A^{b}_{\rho})}, \\
352: &&L^{(1)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}}\ =\ d^{(3)}_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}}
353: A^{a_{1}}_{\nu_{1}}A^{a_{2}}_{\nu_{2}} \frac{\delta}{\delta
354: (g_{a_{3}b}A^{b}_{\rho})}\ \equiv\ d_{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}}
355: A^{a_{1}}_{\nu_{1}}A^{a_{2}}_{\nu_{2}} \frac{\delta}{\delta
356: (g_{a_{3}b}A^{b}_{\rho})}, \\ &&\cdots\cdots \\
357: &&L^{(m)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}}\ =\
358: d^{(m+2)}_{a_{1}a_{2}\cdots a_{m+2}}
359: A^{a_{1}}_{\nu_{1}}A^{a_{2}}_{\nu_{2}} \cdots A^{a_{m+1}}_{\nu_{m+1}}
360: \frac{\delta}{\delta (g_{a_{m+2}b}A^{b}_{\rho})}. \\ &&\cdots\cdots .
361: \end{eqnarray*}
362:
363:
364: In the general case, $L^{(m)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}}$,
365: $m=0,1,2,\dots $ action on the field operators \hfill\break $\Big\{
366: G^{(n)}\ \Big\vert\ n=2,3,\dots \Big\}$ reads
367:
368: \begin{eqnarray*}
369: &&L^{(m)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}} G^{(2)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}}\
370: =\ \delta^{\rho}_{\mu_{1}}
371: G^{(2+m)}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}\mu_{2}} +
372: \delta^{\rho}_{\mu_{2}} G^{(2+m)}_{\mu_{1}\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}},
373: \\ &&L^{(m)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}}
374: G^{(3)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\mu_{3}}\ =\
375: \delta^{\rho}_{\mu_{1}}
376: G^{(3+m)}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}\mu_{2}\mu_{3}} +
377: \delta^{\rho}_{\mu_{2}}
378: G^{(3+m)}_{\mu_{1}\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}\mu_{3}} \\ &&\hskip120pt
379: + \delta^{\rho}_{\mu_{3}}
380: G^{(3+m)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}}, \\
381: &&\cdots\cdots \\ &&L^{(m)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}}
382: G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}}\ =\
383: \delta^{\rho}_{\mu_{1}}
384: G^{(n+m)}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}} +
385: \delta^{\rho}_{\mu_{2}}
386: G^{(n+m)}_{\mu_{1}\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}\mu_{3}\cdots\mu_{n}} \\
387: &&\hskip120pt + \cdots + \delta^{\rho}_{\mu_{n}}
388: G^{(n+m)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n- 1}\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}},
389: \\ &&\cdots\cdots .
390: \end{eqnarray*}
391:
392: Let us now consider the algebraic structure defined by the \break\hfill
393: $\Big\{ L^{(m)}\ \Big\vert\ m=0,1,2,\dots \Big\}$ operators Lie
394: brackets. For the $L^{(0)}$ operators themselves we find
395: \begin{equation}
396: [L^{(0)}, L^{(0)}] \subset L^{(0)},
397: \end{equation}
398: i.e.
399: \begin{equation}
400: [L^{(0)\rho_{1}}_{\nu_{1}}, L^{(0)\rho_{2}}_{\sigma_{1}}] =
401: \delta^{\rho_{1}}_{\sigma_{1}}L^{(0)\rho_{2}}_{\nu_{1}} -
402: \delta^{\rho_{2}}_{\nu_{1}}L^{(0)\rho_{1}}_{\sigma_{1}},
403: \end{equation}
404:
405: In the most general case, for the brackets of $L^{(l)}$ and $L^{(m)}$ we
406: find
407: \begin{equation}
408: [L^{(l)}, L^{(m)}] \subset L^{(l+m)},
409: \end{equation}
410: and more specifically,
411: \begin{eqnarray*}
412: [L^{(l)\rho_{1}}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{l+1}},
413: L^{(m)\rho_{2}}_{\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}\cdots\sigma_{m+1}}] =&&
414: \sum_{i=1}^{m+1} \delta^{\rho_{1}}_{\sigma_{i}}
415: L^{(l+m)\rho_{2}}_{\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}\cdots\sigma_{i-1}
416: \nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{l+1}\sigma_{i+1}\cdots\sigma_{m+1}}\\
417: &-& \sum_{j=1}^{l+1} \delta^{\rho_{2}}_{\nu_{j}}
418: L^{(l+m)\rho_{1}}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{j-1}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}
419: \cdots\sigma_{m+1}\nu_{j+1}\cdots\nu_{l+1}}.
420: \end{eqnarray*}
421:
422: We have constructed an $\infty$-component vector space, $V$ $=$ \break
423: $V( G^{(2)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}},\ G^{(3)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\mu_{3}}, \dots )$,
424: over the $n$-gluon field operators, as well as the corresponding algebra
425: of homogeneous diffeomorphisms,
426: \begin{equation}
427: diff_{0}(4,R)\ =\ \Big\{ L^{(m)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}}
428: \Big\vert m=0,1,2, \dots \Big\};
429: \end{equation}
430: the vector space $V$ is invariant
431: under the action of the $diff_{0}(4,R)$ algebra.
432:
433: Let us point out that there exists a subalgebra of the entire algebra
434: when $m$-values are even, i.e. one has the following structure
435: \begin{eqnarray*}
436: &&[L^{(even)}, L^{(even)}] \subset L^{(even)}, \\
437: &&[L^{(even)}, L^{(odd)}] \subset L^{(odd)}, \\
438: &&[L^{(odd)}, L^{(odd)}] \subset L^{(even)}.
439: \end{eqnarray*}
440:
441: Let us define the dilation-like operator (chromo-dilation) $D$ as a trace
442: of $L^{(0)\rho}_{\nu}$, i.e.,
443: \begin{equation}
444: D = L^{(0)\rho}_{\rho}.
445: \end{equation}
446: This operator commutes with the $L^{(0)\rho}_{\nu}$ operators,
447: \begin{equation}
448: [D, L^{(0)\rho}_{\nu}] = 0,
449: \end{equation}
450: and belongs to the center of the $gl(4,R)$ chromo-gravity subalgebra
451: generated by the $L^{(0)\rho}_{\nu}$ operators. On account of the
452: chromo-dilation operator one can make the following decomposition
453: \begin{equation}
454: gl(4,R) = r \oplus sl(4,R),
455: \end{equation}
456: where $D$ corresponds to the subalgebra $r$, while the basis of the
457: $sl(4,R)$ subalgebra is given by
458: \begin{equation}
459: T^{(0)\rho}_{\nu} = L^{(0)\rho}_{\nu} -
460: \hbox{$\frac{1}{4}$}\delta^{\rho}_{\nu}D.
461: \end{equation}
462:
463: The commutation relation of $D$ with a generic $diff_{0}(4,R)$ operator
464: $L^{(m)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}}$ reads
465: \begin{equation}
466: [D, L^{(m)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}}] = m
467: L^{(m)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}}
468: \end{equation}
469: and thus, the chromo-dilation operator $D$ provides us with a $Z_{+}$
470: grading. This grading justifies and/or explains the $m$-label used for
471: the $L^{(m)\rho}_{\nu_{1}\nu_{2}\cdots\nu_{m+1}}$ operators.
472:
473: The chromo-dilation operator $D$ counts the number of single gluon fields
474: in a multi-gluon configuration, as seen from the following commutation
475: relation
476: \begin{equation}
477: [D, G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}}] = n
478: G^{(n)}_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}}.
479: \end{equation}
480:
481: Clearly, the $J=1$ Yang-Mills gauge of QCD contains (in the IR limit)
482: local diffeomorphisms, gauged \`a la Einstein. As a matter of fact, this
483: is not surprising, as the truncated massless sector of the open string
484: reduces to a $J=1$ Yang-Mills field theory and that the same truncation
485: for the closed string reduces to a $J=2$ gravitational field theory; but
486: the closed string is nothing but the contraction of two open strings!
487:
488:
489: \section{Chromogravity Matter Fields}
490:
491:
492: The effective QCD interaction fields $G_{\mu\nu}$ couple to the hadron
493: systems themselves, and thus, in order to complete the Chromogravity
494: approximation of the QCD IR region, we have to address the question of
495: the effective hadron fields as well. It is well known that the
496: constructions of hadrons, i.e. the composite objects made of quarks and
497: gluons, is due to the strong coupling regime one of the most challenging
498: issues in QCD. Thus, in order to define the effective hadron fields of
499: Chromogravity we rely as much as possible on the symmetry considerations.
500:
501: The $G_{\mu\nu}$ fields, that transform w.r.t. the second-rank symmetric
502: representation of the $Diff(4,R)$ group, are naturally coupled to the
503: bosonic and fermionic hadron fields that transform themselves w.r.t.
504: representations of the $Diff(4,R)$ group as well \cite{wspin}.
505:
506: The construction of the fermionic fields requires the study of the
507: quantum-mechanical $Diff(4,R)$ group, i.e. $Diff(4,R)_{QM}$. Note that
508: the topological properties of the $Diff(4,R)$ group that determine
509: nontrivial minimal group-extensions of the $Diff(4,R)$ group by the
510: $U(1)$ group of the quantum-mechanical Hilbert space phase factors
511: \begin{eqnarray}
512: 1 \rightarrow U(1) \rightarrow Diff(4,R)_{QM} \rightarrow
513: Diff(4,R) \rightarrow 1
514: \end{eqnarray}
515: are given by the corresponding properties of the group chain:
516: \begin{eqnarray}
517: Diff(4,R) \supset GL(4,R) \supset SL(4,R) \supset SO(3,1) \supset SO(3) .
518: \end{eqnarray}
519:
520: It is well known that, in contradistinction to $SO(3,1)$ and $SO(3)$
521: cases, the $SL(4,R)$ group cannot be embedded into any group of finite
522: complex matrices, and that the universal covering of the $SL(4,R)$ group,
523: i.e. $\overline{SL}(4,R)$, is a group of infinite matrices -- likewise
524: for the $\overline{Diff}(4,R)$. The universal covering is actually given
525: by the double covering, and the corresponding relations among relevant
526: symmetry groups are as presented in the following diagram:
527:
528: \begin{center}
529: \begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
530: $1$ & $\rightarrow$ & $Z_2$ & $\rightarrow$ & $\overline{Diff}(4,R)$ &
531: $\rightarrow$ & $Diff(4,R)$ & $\rightarrow$ & $1$ \\
532: & & & & $\cup$ & & $\cup$ & & \\
533: $1$ & $\rightarrow$ & $Z_2$ & $\rightarrow$ & $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ &
534: $\rightarrow$ & $SL(4,R)$ & $\rightarrow$ & $1$ \\
535: & & & & $\cup$ & & $\cup$ & & \\
536: $1$ & $\rightarrow$ & $Z_2$ & $\rightarrow$ & $\overline{SO}(3,1)$ &
537: $\rightarrow$ & $SO(3,1)$ & $\rightarrow$ & $1$ \\
538: & & & & $\cup$ & & $\cup$ & & \\
539: $1$ & $\rightarrow$ & $Z_2$ & $\rightarrow$ & $\overline{SO}(3)$ &
540: $\rightarrow$ & $SO(3)$ & $\rightarrow$ & $1$ \\
541: \end{tabular}
542: \end{center}
543:
544: An immediate consequence is that there are no finite-dimensional
545: spinorial representations of the $\overline{SL}(4,R)$, i.e.
546: $\overline{Diff}(4,R)$ group -- {\em all unitary and non-unitary
547: spinorial representations of these groups are necessarily
548: infinite-dimensional}. In practice, the $\overline{SL}(4,R)$
549: representations are constructed by making use of the "standard" linear
550: representations techniques, while the $\overline{Diff}(4,R)$
551: representations are induced from these $\overline{SL}(4,R)$
552: representations. This fact fits very well with our Chromogravity picture
553: of hadrons, where the entire set of presumably infinitely many
554: excitations of given flavor are to be described by a single
555: infinite-component effective field -- "manifield''.
556:
557: In order to set up all basic quantum mechanical objects, that are
558: necessary for particle physics applications, we have to consider:
559:
560: (i) The fermionic and bosonic (infinite-component) representations of the
561: $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ group that characterize respectively the baryonic
562: and mesonic quantum manifields,
563:
564: (ii) The fermionic and bosonic (infinite-component) representations of
565: the inhomogenious $SA(4,R) = T_4 \wedge \overline{SL}(4,R)$ group (affine
566: generalization of the Poincar\'e group) that characterize the quantum
567: states of the manifields quanta,
568:
569: (iii) The wave equation type relations that insure consistency between
570: manifields and the corresponding quantum states, and
571:
572: (iv) The physical requirements that are primarily related to the
573: unitarity properties of various observable facts.
574:
575: The affine group $\overline{SA}(4,R) = T_{4} \wedge \overline{SL}(4,R)$,
576: is a semidirect product of translations generated by $P_{\mu},\ \mu =
577: 0,1,2,3$ and $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ generated by $Q_{\mu\nu}$ ($\mu ,\nu
578: =0,1,2,3$). The antisymmetric operators $M_{\mu\nu} = \frac{1}{2}
579: (Q_{\mu\nu} - Q_{\nu\mu})$ generate the Lorentz subgroup
580: $\overline{SO}(3,1)$, while the symmetric traceless operators (shears)
581: $T_{\mu\nu} = \frac{1}{2} (Q_{\mu\nu} + Q_{\mu\nu}) - \frac{1}{4}
582: \eta_{\mu\nu} Q_{\sigma}^{\ \sigma}$ generate the proper
583: $4$-volume-preserving deformations.
584:
585: As in the Poincar\'e case, the $\overline{SA}(4,R)$ unitary
586: irreducible representations are induced from the representations of
587: the
588: corresponding little group $T^{\prime}_{3}
589: \wedge \overline{SL}(3,R),\ m\neq 0$. In the physically most interesting
590: case $T^{\prime}_{3}$ is represented trivially. The corresponding
591: particle states have to be described by the unitary representations of
592: the remaining part of the little group, i.e. $\overline{SL}(3,R)$. All
593: these representations, both spinorial and tensorial, are
594: infinite-dimensional owing to the $\overline{SL}(3,R)$ noncompactness.
595: Therefore, the corresponding $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ matter fields $\Psi
596: (x),\ \Phi (x)$ are necessarily infinite-dimensional and when reduced
597: with respect to the $\overline{SL}(3,R)$ subgroup should transform with
598: respect to its unitary irreducible quantum-states representations .
599:
600: If the whole $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ group would be represented unitarily,
601: the Lorentz boost generators intrinsic part would be hermitian and as a
602: result, when boosting a particle, one would obtain a particle with a
603: different spin, i.e. another particle - contrary to experience. There
604: exists however a remarkable inner {\it deunitarizing} automorphism ${\cal
605: A}$ \cite{sl4} of the $SL(4,R)$ group, which leaves its $R_{+} \otimes
606: \overline{SL}(3,R)$ subgroup intact, and which maps the $T_{0k}$,
607: $M_{0k}$ generators into $iM_{0k}$, $iT_{0k}$ respectively ($k=1,2,3$).
608: In other words it exchanges the $\overline{SO}(4)$ and
609: $\overline{SO}(3,1)$ subgroups of the $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ group
610: mutually. The deunitarizing automorphism allows us to start with the
611: unitary (irreducible) representations of the $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ group,
612: and upon its application, to identify the finite (unitary)
613: representations of the "abstract" $\overline{SO}(4)$ compact subgroup
614: with nonunitary representations of the physical Lorentz group --
615: $\overline{SO}(3,1) = \overline{SO}(4)^{\cal A}$ . In this way, we avoid
616: a disease common to most of infinite-component wave equations, in
617: particular those based on groups containing the $\overline{SL}(4,R)$
618: group.
619:
620:
621: \section{Hadron Spectroscopy}
622:
623:
624: The catalogue of the $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ multiplicity-free unitary
625: irreducible representations is presented in \cite{sl4} , and by making
626: use of the deunitarizing automorphism ${\cal A}$, we arrive at the
627: infinite-dimensional $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ representations for which
628: the Lorentz subgroup is represented nonunitarily. Moreover, for the
629: relevant cases the Lorentz-covariant (flat-space) infinite-component
630: wave equations which determine the physical (propagating) degrees of
631: freedom are given in \cite{we}, and thus we can proceed with the
632: actual applications to hadron classification.
633:
634: In the case of mesons there are two $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ representations
635: at our disposal: $D_{SL(4,R)}^{ladd}(0)^{\cal A}$ and
636: $D_{SL(4,R)}^{ladd}(\frac{1}{2})^{\cal A}$. Having in mind the quark
637: model, it is most natural to classify the $\bar{q}q$ meson states
638: according to the $D_{SL(4,R)}^{ladd}(\frac{1}{2})^{\cal A}$
639: representation, i.e., to have as the lowest level the $J=0, 1$ ($^1S_{0}$
640: and $^3S_{1}$) states. The $D_{SL(4,R)}^{ladd}(0)^{\cal A}$
641: representation would be an appropriate choice for the possible glueballs.
642: In the case of baryons, for the flavor $SU(3)$ octet states we have a
643: unique choice of the system based on the
644: $[D_{SL(4,R)}^{disc}(\frac{1}{2},0) \oplus
645: D_{SL(4,R)}^{disc}(0,\frac{1}{2})]^{{\cal A}}$ system, while for the
646: decuplet states we have to make use of the symmetrized product of this
647: reducible representation and the finite-dimensional $\overline{SL}(4,R)$
648: representation $(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})$ (generalizing the Rarita -
649: Schwinger approach). The $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ generators have definite
650: space-time properties, and in particular a constrained behavior under the
651: parity operation: The $J_{i} = \epsilon_{ijk} M_{jk}$, $T_{ij}$, and
652: $T_{00}$ operators are parity even, while the $K_{i} = M_{0i}$ and $N_{i}
653: = T_{0i} $ are parity odd. All states of the same $\overline{SL}(3,R)$
654: subgroup unitary irreducible representation (Regge trajectory) thus
655: have the same parity; the states of an $SL(2,C) \simeq
656: \overline{SO}(3,1)$ or an $\overline{SO}(4)$
657: subgroup representation have alternating parities. For a given $SL(2,C) =
658: \overline{SO}(4)^{\cal A}$ representation ($j_{1},j_{2}$), the total
659: (spin) angular momentum is
660: \begin{equation}
661: J = J^{(1)} + J^{(2)},
662: \end{equation}
663: while the boost operator is given by
664: \begin{equation}
665: K = J^{(1)} - J^{(2)}.
666: \end{equation}
667: We find the following $J^{P}$ content of a $(j_{1},j_{2})$
668: $\overline{SO}(4)^{\cal A}$ representation:
669: \begin{equation}
670: J^{P} = (j_{1}+j_{2})^{P},\ (j_{1}+j_{2}-1)^{-P},\ (j_{1}+j_{2}-2)^{P},\
671: \cdots ,\ (|j_{1}-j_{2}|)^{\pm P}.
672: \end{equation}
673: Thus, by assigning a given parity to any state of an $\overline{SL}(4,R)$
674: representation, say the lowest state, the parities of all other states
675: are determined.
676:
677: The $\overline{SL}(3,R)$ subgroup unitary irreducible representations
678: \cite{sl3} determine the Regge trajectory states of a given
679: $\overline{SL}(4,R)^{\cal A}$ representation. In decomposing an
680: $\overline{SL}(4,R)^{\cal A}$ representation with respect to the
681: $\overline{SL}(3,R)$ unitary irreducible representations, it is
682: convenient to use an integer quantum number $n$ that is in one-to-one
683: correspondence with the $T_{00}$ operator eigen values.
684:
685: The $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ ladder unitary irreducible representations
686: contain an infinite sum of $\overline{SL}(3,R)$ ladder unitary
687: irreducible representations, i.e.,
688: \begin{equation*}
689: D_{SL(4,R)}^{ladd}(0;e_{2}) \rightarrow {\sum_{n\ even}}^{\oplus}
690: D_{SL(3,R)}^{ladd}(0;\sigma_{2}) \oplus {\sum_{n\ odd}}^{\oplus}
691: D_{SL(3,R)}^{ladd}(1;\sigma_{2}),
692: \end{equation*}
693: \begin{equation*}
694: D_{SL(4,R)}^{ladd}(\frac{1}{2};e_{2}) \rightarrow {\sum_{n\
695: even}}^{\oplus} D_{SL(3,R)}^{ladd}(1;\sigma_{2}) \oplus {\sum_{n\
696: odd}}^{\oplus} D_{SL(3,R)}^{ladd}(0;\sigma_{2}).
697: \end{equation*}
698: An analysis shows that the reduction of the
699: $D_{SL(4,R)}^{disc}(\frac{1}{2},0)$ and
700: $D_{SL(4,R)}^{disc}(0,\frac{1}{2})$ representations with respect to the
701: unitary irreducible representations of $\overline{SL}(3,R)$ is given
702: by the symbolic expression
703: \begin{equation*}
704: D_{SL(4,R)}^{disc}({1\over 2},0) \oplus D_{SL(4,R)}^{disc}(0,{1\over 2})
705: \rightarrow {\sum_{n \ even}}^{\oplus} D_{SL(3,R)}^{ladd}({1\over 2})
706: \oplus {\sum_{n\ odd}}^{\oplus} D_{SL(3,R)}^{disc}({3\over
707: 2};\sigma_{2});
708: \end{equation*}
709: each $\overline{SL}(3,R)$ unitary irreducible representation appears
710: infinitely many times.
711:
712: We find it necessary, from a comparison with the experimental situation,
713: to use parity doubling, the actual spectrum displaying approximate
714: exchange-degeneracy features. The parity of states within an
715: $\overline{SL}(4,R)^{\cal A}$ representation is determined by the parity
716: of the lowest - $J$ state.
717:
718: Thus, {\it we assign all hadron states of a given flavor to the
719: wave-equation-projected states corresponding to parity-doubled
720: $\overline{SL}(4,R)^{\cal A}$ irreducible representations} (their lowest
721: - $J$ states have opposite parities) \cite{hadrons}.
722:
723: \vskip6pt
724: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% begin N_Sigma baryons %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
725: \hskip -25pt {\scriptsize
726: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
727: \multicolumn{10}{|c|}{TABLE I \hskip20pt Assignment of $N$, $\Lambda$ and
728: $\Sigma$\ \ $SU(3)$ octet states} \\ \hline\hline
729: \multicolumn{5}{|c|}{$D(0,\frac{1}{2})$} &
730: \multicolumn{5}{|c|}{$D(0,\frac{1}{2})$} \\ \hline
731: $(j_{1},j_{2})$ & $J^{P}$ & $\{ N\}$ & $\{\Lambda\}$ & $\{\Sigma\}$ &
732: $(j_{1},j_{2})$ & $J^{P}$ & $\{ N\}$ & $\{\Lambda\}$ & $\{\Sigma\}$
733: \\ \hline
734: $(\frac{1}{2},0)$ & $\frac{1}{2}^{+}$ & $N(940)$ & $\Lambda (1116)$ &
735: $\Sigma (1193)$ & $(0,\frac{1}{2})$ & $\frac{1}{2}^{-}$ & $N(1535)$ &
736: $\Lambda (1670)$ & $\underline{\Sigma}(\sim 1500)$
737: \\ \hline
738: & $\frac{1}{2}^{+}$ & $N(1440)$ & $\Lambda (1600)$ & $\Sigma (1660)$ &
739: & $\frac{1}{2}^{-}$ & $N(1650)$ & $\Lambda (1800)$ & $\Sigma(1620)$
740: \\
741: $(\frac{3}{2},1)$ & $\frac{3}{2}^{-}$ & $N(1520)$ & $\Lambda (1690)$ &
742: $\Sigma (1670)$ & $(1,\frac{3}{2})$ & $\frac{3}{2}^{+}$ &
743: $\underline{N}(1540)$ & $\Lambda (1890)$ & $\Sigma (1670)$
744: \\
745: & $\frac{5}{2}^{+}$ & $N(1680)$ & $\Lambda (1820)$ &
746: $\Sigma (1915)$ & & $\frac{5}{2}^{-}$ & $N(1675)$ & $\Lambda (1830)$ &
747: $\Sigma (1775)$
748: \\ \hline
749: & $\frac{1}{2}^{+}$ & $N(1710)$ & $\Lambda (1800)$ & $\Sigma (1880)$ &
750: & $\frac{1}{2}^{-}$ & $N(2090)$ & & $\Sigma (1750)$
751: \\
752: & $\frac{3}{2}^{-}$ & $N(1700)$ & $\Lambda (2000)$ & & &
753: $\frac{3}{2}^{+}$ & $N(1720)$ & & $\Sigma (1840)$
754: \\
755: $(\frac{5}{2},2)$ & $\frac{5}{2}^{+}$ & $N(2000)$ & $\Lambda (2110)$ & &
756: $(2,\frac{5}{2})$ & $\frac{5}{2}^{-}$ & $N(2200)$ &
757: &
758: \\
759: & $\frac{7}{2}^{-}$ & $N(2190)$ & & & & $\frac{7}{2}^{+}$ &
760: $N(1990)$ & $\underline{\Lambda}(2020)$ &
761: \\
762: & $\frac{9}{2}^{+}$ & $N(2220)$ & $\Lambda (2350)$ & $\Sigma (2455)$
763: & & $\frac{9}{2}^{-}$ & $N(2250)$ & &
764: \\ \hline
765: & $\frac{1}{2}^{+}$ & $\underline{N}(2100)$ & & $\Sigma (2250)$ &
766: & $\frac{1}{2}^{-}$ & & &
767: \\
768: & $\frac{3}{2}^{-}$ & $N(2080)$ & $\Lambda (2325)$ & &
769: & $\frac{3}{2}^{+}$ & & &
770: \\
771: & $\frac{5}{2}^{+}$ & & & & & $\frac{5}{2}^{-}$ & & &
772: \\
773: $(\frac{7}{2},3)$ & $\frac{7}{2}^{-}$ & & & & $(3,\frac{7}{2})$
774: & $\frac{7}{2}^{+}$ & & &
775: \\
776: & $\frac{9}{2}^{+}$ & & & & & $\frac{9}{2}^{-}$ & & &
777: \\
778: & $\frac{11}{2}^{-}$ & $N(2600)$ & & & & $\frac{11}{2}^{+}$ &
779: & &
780: \\
781: & $\frac{13}{2}^{+}$ & $N(2700)$ & & & & $\frac{13}{2}^{-}$ & & &
782: \\ \hline
783: \end{tabular}
784: }
785: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% end N_Sigma baryons %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
786: \vskip6pt
787:
788: {\bf Mesons} $(q\bar q)$: $D_{SL(4,R)}^{ladd}(\frac{1}{2};e_{2})^{\cal
789: A},\ \Phi ,$
790: \begin{equation}
791: \{ (j_{1},j_{2})\} = \{ ({1\over 2},{1\over 2}),\ ({3\over 2},{3\over
792: 2}), \ ({5\over 2},{5\over 2}),\ \cdots \}
793: \end{equation}
794:
795: {\bf Baryons} $(qqq)_{mixed symmetry}$:
796: $[D_{SL(4,R)}^{disc}(\frac{1}{2},0) \oplus
797: D_{SL(4,R)}^{disc}(0,\frac{1}{2})]^{\cal A},\ \Psi ,$
798: \begin{equation}
799: \{ (j_{1},j_{2})\} = \{ (\frac{1}{2},0),\ (\frac{3}{2},1),\
800: (\frac{5}{2},0),\ \cdots \} \oplus \{ (0,\frac{1}{2}),\ (1,\frac{3}{2}),\
801: (2,\frac{5}{2}),\ \cdots \} .
802: \end{equation}
803:
804: {\bf Baryons} $(qqq)_{symmetric}$: $ \{
805: [D_{SL(4,R)}^{disc}(\frac{1}{2},0) \oplus
806: D_{SL(4,R)}^{disc}(0,\frac{1}{2})]^{\cal A} \otimes
807: D^{(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})} \}_{sym},\ \Psi_{\rho},$
808: \begin{equation}
809: \{ (j_{1},j_{2})\} = \{ (1,\frac{1}{2}), (2,\frac{3}{2}),
810: (3,\frac{5}{2}), \cdots \} \oplus \{ (\frac{1}{2},1), (\frac{3}{2},2),
811: (\frac{5}{2},3), \cdots \}.
812: \end{equation}
813:
814: The $\overline{SO}(4)^{\cal A}$ states, when reorganized
815: with respect to the $\overline{SL}(3,R)$ subgroup, form an infinite sum
816: of Regge-type $\Delta J=2$ recurrences with the $J$ content
817: \begin{equation}
818: \{ J\} = \{ \frac{1}{2},\ \frac{5}{2},\ \frac{9}{2},\ \cdots \}, \{ J\} =
819: \{ \frac{3}{2},\ \frac{7}{2},\ \frac{11}{2},\ \cdots \}.
820: \end{equation}
821: The former states belong to $D_{SL(3,R)}^{ladd}(\frac{1}{2})$, while the
822: latter ones are projected out of $D_{SL(3,R)}^{ladd}(\frac{3}{2},
823: \sigma_{2})$ by the field equations. Note that we have thus achieved the
824: goal of a fully relativistic algebraic model in terms of the total
825: angular momentum $J$.
826:
827: \vskip6pt
828: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% begin Delta_Sigma baryons %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
829: {\scriptsize
830: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
831: \multicolumn{8}{|c|}{TABLE II \hskip20pt Assignment of $\Delta$ and
832: $\Sigma$\ \ $SU(3)$ decuplet states. } \\ \hline\hline
833: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$D(\frac{1}{2},0)_{\mu}$} &
834: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{$D(0,\frac{1}{2})_{\mu}$}
835: \\ \hline
836: $(j_{1},j_{2})$ & $J^{P}$ & $\{ \Delta \}$ & $\{\Sigma\}$ &
837: $(j_{1},j_{2})$ & $J^{P}$ & $\{ \Delta \}$ & $\{\Sigma\}$
838: \\ \hline
839: $(1,\frac{1}{2})$ & $\frac{1}{2}^{-}$ & $\Delta (1620)$ &
840: & $(\frac{1}{2},1)$ & $\frac{1}{2}^{+}$ & $\underline{\Delta}(1550)$ &
841: $\Sigma (1770)$
842: \\
843: & $\frac{3}{2}^{+}$ & $\Delta (1232)$ & $\Sigma (1385)$
844: & & $\frac{3}{2}^{-}$ & $\Delta (1700)$ & $\Sigma (1580)$
845: \\ \hline
846: & $\frac{1}{2}^{-}$ & $\Delta (1900)$ & $\underline{\Sigma} (2000)$ &
847: & $\frac{1}{2}^{+}$ & $\Delta (1910)$ &
848: \\
849: $(2,\frac{3}{2})$ & $\frac{3}{2}^{+}$ & $\Delta (1600)$ & $\Sigma
850: (1690)$ & $(\frac{3}{2},2)$ & $\frac{3}{2}^{-}$ & $\underline{\Delta
851: }(1940)$ & $\Sigma (1940)$
852: \\
853: & $\frac{5}{2}^{-}$ & & & & $\frac{5}{2}^{+}$ &
854: $\Delta (1905)$ &
855: \\
856: & $\frac{7}{2}^{+}$ & $\Delta (1950)$ & $\Sigma (2030)$ & &
857: $\frac{7}{2}^{-}$ & &
858: \\ \hline
859: & $\frac{1}{2}^{-}$ & $\underline{\Delta}(2150)$ & & &
860: $\frac{1}{2}^{+}$ & &
861: \\
862: & $\frac{3}{2}^{+}$ & $\Delta (1920)$ & $\Sigma (2080)$ & &
863: $\frac{3}{2}^{-}$ & &
864: \\
865: $(3,\frac{5}{2})$ & $\frac{5}{2}^{-}$ & $\Delta (1930)$ & &
866: $(\frac{5}{2},3)$ & $\frac{5}{2}^{+}$ & $\Delta (2000)$ &
867: $\underline{\Sigma}(2070)$
868: \\
869: & $\frac{7}{2}^{+}$ & & & & $\frac{7}{2}^{-}$ &
870: $\underline{\Delta}(2200)$ & $\underline{\Sigma}(2150)$
871: \\
872: & $\frac{9}{2}^{-}$ & $\Delta (2400)$ & & & $\frac{9}{2}^{+}$ &
873: $\Delta (2300)$ &
874: \\
875: & $\frac{11}{2}^{+}$ & $\Delta (2420)$ & $\Sigma (2620)$ & &
876: $\frac{11}{2}^{-}$ & &
877: \\ \hline
878: & $\frac{1}{2}^{-}$ & & & & $\frac{1}{2}^{+}$ & &
879: \\
880: & $\frac{3}{2}^{+}$ & & & & $\frac{3}{2}^{-}$ & &
881: \\
882: & $\frac{5}{2}^{-}$ & $\underline{\Delta}(2350)$ & & &
883: $\frac{5}{2}^{-}$ & &
884: \\
885: $(4,\frac{7}{2})$ & $\frac{7}{2}^{+}$ & $\Delta (2390)$ & &
886: $(\frac{7}{2},4)$ & $\frac{7}{2}^{-}$ & &
887: \\
888: & $\frac{9}{2}^{-}$ & & & & $\frac{9}{2}^{+}$ & &
889: \\
890: & $\frac{11}{2}^{+}$ & & & & $\frac{11}{2}^{-}$ & &
891: \\
892: & $\frac{13}{2}^{-}$ & $\Delta (2750)$ & & & $\frac{13}{2}^{+}$ & &
893: \\
894: & $\frac{15}{2}^{+}$ & $\Delta (2950)$ & & & $\frac{15}{2}^{-}$ & &
895: \\ \hline
896: \end{tabular}
897: }
898: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% end Delta_Sigma baryons %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
899: \vskip6pt
900:
901: As an example we present in the Table I the $N$, $\Lambda$, and $\Sigma$
902: octet states $\{ {\bf 8}\}$, while the $\Delta$ and $\Sigma$ decuplet
903: states $\{ {\bf 10}\}$ are presented in Table II. The $SU(3)$ $\Sigma$
904: assignment is not known completely. Note that the $J=\frac{1}{2}$ $\{
905: {\bf 10}\}$ states come from the $J=0$ part of the
906: $(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})$ explicit index in $\Psi_{\mu}$ of (C9), while
907: the other $\{ {\bf 10}\}$ states come from the $J=1$ part - thus a
908: discrepancy in mass.
909:
910: We find a striking match between the ($J^{P}$, mass) values and the wave
911: - equation - projected $\overline{SL}(4,R)^{\cal A}$ representation
912: states. Moreover, a remarkably simple mass formula (straightforward
913: generalization of the mass-spin - Regge relation) fits these infinite
914: systems of hadronic states. For the $\{ {\bf 8}\}$ and the higher-spin
915: $\{ {\bf 10}\}$ baryon resonances we write:
916: \begin{equation}
917: m^{2} = m_{0}^{2} + (\alpha_{f}^{\prime})^{-1} (j_{1} +j_{2} -
918: \frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{2}n),
919: \end{equation}
920: where $m_{0}$ is the mass of the lowest-lying state,
921: $\alpha_{f}^{\prime}$ is the slope of the Regge trajectory for that
922: flavor. The linear $J\ \simeq m^2$ relation is taken here
923: phenomenologically. However, it will be demonstrated below that this
924: relation can indeed be derived from Chromogravity dynamics with a
925: natural choice of a Lagrangian.
926:
927:
928: \section{$J \simeq m^2$ relation}
929:
930:
931: In the absence of Chromogravity, the matter Lagrangian would be
932: \cite{Jm2}
933: \begin{equation}
934: L_{M} = \overline{\Psi} i X^{\mu}{\partial}_{\mu} \Psi + {\partial}^{\mu}
935: \Phi {\partial}_{\mu} \Phi ,
936: \end{equation}
937: invariant under global $\overline{SL}(4,R).$ The Hilbert spaces of $\Psi$
938: and $\Phi$ are given by the representations of $\overline{SA}(4,R)$.
939: Chromogravity enters through the replacement ${\partial}_{\mu}
940: \rightarrow {\hat D}_{A}$, where the index "$A$" denotes a local frame:
941: ${\hat D}_{\mu} = {\partial}_{\mu} - {{\Gamma}^{A}}_{B\mu} {Q_{A}}^{B}$,
942: ${\hat D}_{A} = {e_{A}}^{\mu}{\hat D}_{\mu}$ with $\Gamma$ the
943: connection and ${e_{A}}^{\mu} \cdot {e_{\mu}}^{B} =
944: {{\delta}_{A}}^{B}$, $e$ the chromogravity tetrad; ${Q_{A}}^{B}$ is the
945: $sl(4,R)$ algebraic generator in the tangent frame. We use ${\hat D}$ for
946: the full covariant derivative with $sl(4,R)$ connection.
947: ${e^{A}}_{\mu}(x)$ and ${{\Gamma}^{A}}_{B\mu}(x)$ can be taken as gauge
948: fields for $\overline{SA}(4,R)$:
949: \begin{equation}
950: {\delta}_{(\epsilon ,\alpha )}\Psi = [ - {\epsilon}^{A}(x){\partial}_{A}
951: - {{\alpha}^{A}}_{B}(x) {V_{A}}^{B}]\Psi.
952: \end{equation}
953:
954: As in gravity, the corresponding field strengths are the torsion and the
955: (generalized) curvature \cite{mag}, i.e.
956: \begin{eqnarray}
957: &&{{\hat R}^{A}}\,_{\mu\nu} = {\partial}_{\mu}{e^{A}}_{\nu} +
958: {{\Gamma}^{A}}_{B\mu}{e^{B}}_{\nu} - (\mu \leftrightarrow \nu ) \\
959: &&{{\hat R}^{A}}\,_{B\mu\nu} = {\partial}_{\mu}{{\Gamma}^{A}}_{B\nu} +
960: {{\Gamma}^{C}}_{B\mu}{{\Gamma}^{A}}_{C\nu} - (\mu \leftrightarrow \nu )
961: \end{eqnarray}
962: \noindent The Noether currents resulting from this
963: $\overline{SA}(4,R)$ invariance are the energy-momentum and
964: hypermomentum,
965: \begin{eqnarray}
966: &&{{\Theta}_{A}}^{\mu} = \frac{1}{\hat e}\ \frac{\delta L_{M}}{\delta
967: {e^{A}}_{\mu}}, \hskip20pt {\hat e} \equiv det({e^{A}}_{\mu}),\\
968: &&{{\Upsilon}^{B}}_{A\mu} = \frac{1}{\hat e}\ \frac{\delta L_{M}}{\delta
969: {{\Gamma}^{A}}_{B\mu}},
970: \end{eqnarray}
971: \noindent with the symmetric
972: $(AB)$ pairs denoting shear currents and the antisymmetric pairs $[AB]$
973: representing angular momentum.
974:
975: The effective action for this IR (zero-color) hadron sector of QCD,
976: written as a Chromogravitational theory, with matter in
977: $\overline{SL}(4,R)$ manifields, then becomes
978: \begin{equation}
979: I = \int d^{4}x\sqrt{-G}\bigl\{ -a R_{\mu\nu}R^{\mu\nu} + b R^{2} -
980: cl_{G}^{-2} R + l_{S}^{-2} {\Sigma}_{\mu\nu}^{\ \
981: \sigma}{\Sigma}^{\mu\nu}_ {\ \ \sigma} + l_{Q}^{-2} {\Delta}_{\mu\nu}^{\
982: \ \sigma} {\Delta}^{\mu\nu}_{\ \ \sigma} + L_{M} \bigr\} .
983: \end{equation}
984:
985: The first three terms constitute the Lagrangian that yields the $p^{-4}$
986: propagators. The fourth and fifth terms are spin-spin and shear-shear
987: contact interaction terms.
988:
989: We linearize the theory in terms of $H_{\mu\nu}(x) = G_{\mu\nu}(x) -
990: {\eta}_{\mu\nu}$, where ${\eta}_{\mu\nu}$ is the Minkowski metric. Taking
991: just the homogeneous part, as required for the evaluation of the
992: propagator, we get for the $H_{\mu\nu}$ field the equation of motion
993: \begin{equation}
994: \bigl( \frac{a}{4}\ {\square}^{\ 2} - \frac{1}{2}l_{S}^{-2}\
995: {\Sigma}_{\rho\eta}^{\ \ \lambda}{\Sigma}^{\rho\eta}_{\ \ \lambda} -
996: \frac{1}{2}l_{Q}^{-2}\ {\Delta}_{\rho\eta}^{\ \ \lambda}
997: {\Delta}^{\rho\eta}_{\ \ \lambda}\bigr) H_{\mu\nu} = 0,
998: \end{equation}
999: \noindent which becomes in momentum space
1000: \begin{equation}
1001: \bigl( \frac{a}{4}\ {(p^{2})}^{2} - \frac{1}{2} l_{S}^{-2} f_{S}\
1002: M_{\eta}^{\ \lambda}M^{\eta}_{\ \lambda} - \frac{1}{2} l_{Q}^{-2} f_{Q}\
1003: T_{\eta}^{\ \lambda}T^{\eta}_{\ \lambda} \bigr) H_{\mu\nu}(p) =0.
1004: \end{equation}
1005:
1006: For pseudo-gravity, we may regard these equations as {\it the dynamical
1007: equations above the theory's "vacuum", as represented by hadron matter
1008: itself}.
1009:
1010: In the rest frame (stability) "little" group is $\overline{SL}(3,R)
1011: \subset \overline{SL}(4,R)$. Taking a hadron's rest frame
1012: \begin{equation}
1013: M_{\eta}^{\ \lambda}M^{\eta}_{\ \lambda} \rightarrow M_{i}^{\ j}M^{i}_{\
1014: j} \rightarrow J(J + 1),
1015: \end{equation}
1016: \begin{equation}
1017: T_{\eta}^{\ \lambda}T^{\eta}_{\ \lambda} \rightarrow T_{i}^{\ j}T^{i}_{\
1018: j} \rightarrow M_{i}^{\ j}M^{i}_{\ j} - A^{2}_{sl(3,R)} \rightarrow J(J +
1019: 1) - C^{2}_{sl(3,R)},
1020: \end{equation}
1021: \noindent where $C^{2}$ is the $sl(3,R)$ quadratic invariant.
1022:
1023: \begin{center}
1024: \input{regge.eepic}
1025: \end{center}
1026:
1027: As a result, we find that in a rest frame, all hadronic states belonging
1028: to a single $\overline{SL}(3,R)$ (unitary) irreducible representation
1029: (i.e. one value of $C^{2}_{sl(3,R)}$) lay on a single trajectory in the
1030: Chew-Frautschi plane, i.e.
1031: \begin{equation}
1032: (J + \frac{1}{2})^{2} = ({\alpha '}m^{2})^{2} + {\alpha}_{0}^{2},
1033: \end{equation}
1034: \begin{equation}
1035: (\alpha ')^{2} = \bigl[ \frac{2}{a} (l_{S}^{-2} f_{S} + l_{Q}^{-2}
1036: f_{Q})\bigr]^{-1},
1037: \end{equation}
1038: \begin{equation}
1039: {\alpha}_{0}^{2} = \frac{1}{4} + \frac{l_{Q}^{-2}f_{Q}}{l_{S}^{-2} f_{S} +
1040: l_{Q}^{-2}f_{Q}} C^{2}_{sl(3,R)}.
1041: \end{equation}
1042: \noindent $\alpha '$ is the (asymptotic) trajectory slope, $S$ is the
1043: Cartan's chromo-torsion tensor, while $Q = D\ G$ is the
1044: chromo-non-metricity tensor. Neglecting a slight bending at small
1045: $m^{2}$,i.e. the ${\alpha}_{0}^{2}$ term, we finally obtain the linear
1046: Regge trajectory
1047: \begin{equation}
1048: J = {\alpha '} m^{2} - \frac{1}{2}.
1049: \end{equation}
1050: A combined result of the $\overline{SL}(4,R) \supset R_{+}\otimes
1051: \overline{SL}(3,R)$ representation reduction states and the $J \simeq
1052: m^2$ relation is illustrated on the above figure.
1053:
1054:
1055:
1056:
1057: \section{IBM -- Interacting Boson Model Derivation}
1058:
1059:
1060: The Interacting Boson Model has been very successful as a dynamical
1061: symmetry in correlating as well as providing an understanding of a large
1062: amount of data which manifest the collective behavior of nuclei. The
1063: model's point of departure is the observation that the two lowest levels
1064: in the great majority of even-even nuclei are the $0^{+}$ and $2^{+}$
1065: levels, with relatively close excitation energies, realized by proton or
1066: neutron pairs. The model postulates a corresponding phenomenological
1067: $U(6)$ symmetry.
1068:
1069: As demonstrated above, the strongly-coupled IR region in QCD is
1070: approximated by the exchange of a phenomenological chromometric
1071: di-gluon field $G_{\mu\nu}(x)$. The $G_{\mu\nu}(x)$ acts formally
1072: as a Riemannian metric, i.e. it obeys the following Riemannian constraint:
1073: \begin{equation}
1074: D_{\sigma}G_{\mu\nu}(x) = 0.
1075: \end{equation}
1076: where $D_{\sigma}$ is the covariant derivative of the effective gravity,
1077: with the connection given by a Christoffel symbol constructed with this
1078: effective metric. As a result, the surviving quanta are color neutral
1079: and have $J^P = 0^+,\ 2^+$, with symmetric couplings to matter fields.
1080:
1081: We now stretch the Chromogravity application from a single hadron case
1082: over to the composite hadronic system of nuclear matter \cite{ibm} in a
1083: Van der Waals fashion. As in the hadronic case, the next vibrational,
1084: rotational or pulsed excitations will correspond to the "addition" of one
1085: such collective color-singlet multigluon quantum superposition, while
1086: the basic exchanged quantum is generated by "gluonium" $G_{\mu\nu}(x)$.
1087:
1088: An effective Riemannian metric induces the corresponding Einsteinian
1089: dynamics. The invariant action in which the Einstein-like Lagrangian $R$
1090: is accompanied by a parametrized combination of the allowed quadratic
1091: terms reads
1092: \begin{equation}
1093: I_{inv} = - \int d^{4}x \sqrt{-G} (\alpha R_{\mu\nu} R^{\mu\nu} - \beta
1094: R^{2} + \gamma{\kappa}^{-2} R).
1095: \end{equation}
1096:
1097: The theory is renormalizable, a feature befitting the present
1098: application, since QCD is renormalizable, but is not unitary, which also
1099: befits this application: a "piece" of QCD should not be unitary,
1100: considering that QCD is an irreducible theory. The renormalizability is
1101: caused by $p^{-4}$ propagators. {\it $p^{-4}$ propagators are dynamically
1102: equivalent to confinement}!
1103:
1104: Moreover, it has been shown that the presence of the quadratic terms in
1105: the action induces a potential $\sim \frac{1}{r} + r + r^{2}$.
1106:
1107: {\bf Nuclei}. Out of the $10$ components of $G_{\mu\nu}$ the 6 that survive
1108: the 4 Riemannian constraints have spin/parity assignments $J^{P} = 0^{+},
1109: \ 2^{+}$.
1110:
1111: The non-relativistic subgroup of $SL(4,R)$ is $SL(3,R)$. Under this
1112: group, the $0^{+}$ and $2^{+}$ states span together one irreducible
1113: 6-dimensional representation, thus both $0^{+}$ and $2^{+}$ couple with
1114: the same strength to nucleons. There is thus full justification for the
1115: IBM postulate of a $U(6)$ symmetry between the defining states!
1116:
1117: The closed shells assume the role of "vacua", as rigid structures.
1118: Gluonium excitations should then be searched for in the valence nucleon
1119: systematics.
1120:
1121: The corresponding Hamiltonian in terms of $b = \{s,d\}$ and $b^{+} =
1122: \{s^{+}, d^{+}\}$ that represent the destruction and creation of a
1123: 6-dimensional gluonium quantum reads:
1124:
1125: \begin{equation*}
1126: H = \frac{1}{M^{3}} \int dk \{ C_{1} \frac{k^2}{\kappa^2} (b^{+}b) + C_{2}
1127: \frac{k^2}{\kappa^2}(b^{+}\bullet b)(b^{+}\bullet b) + A_{1}
1128: k^{4}(b^{+}\bullet b)(b^{+}\bullet b)
1129: \end{equation*}
1130: \begin{equation}
1131: + A_{2} k^{4} (b^{+}\bullet b)(b^{+}\bullet b)(b^{+}\bullet b) + A_{3}
1132: k^{4} (b^{+}\bullet b)(b^{+}\bullet b) (b^{+}\bullet b)(b^{+}\bullet b)).
1133: \end{equation}
1134:
1135: {\bf Symmetries of deformed nuclei}
1136:
1137: In the quantum case, we can write,
1138: $G_{\mu\nu} = T_{\mu\nu} + U_{\mu\nu}$, where
1139: \begin{equation}
1140: T_{\mu\nu} = \eta_{ab} \int d{\tilde k}
1141: [{\alpha^{a}_{\mu}}^{+}(k){\alpha^{b}_{\nu}}^{+}(k) e^{2ikx} +
1142: \alpha^{a}_{\mu}(k)\alpha^{b}_{\nu}(k) e^{-2ikx}],
1143: \end{equation}
1144: and
1145: \begin{equation}
1146: U_{\mu\nu} = \eta_{ab} \int d{\tilde k} [{\alpha^{a}_{\mu}}^{+}(k)
1147: \alpha^{b}_{\nu}(k) + \alpha^{a}_{\mu}(k) {\alpha^{b}_{\nu}}^{+}(k)].
1148: \end{equation}
1149:
1150: This time we use the creation and annihilation operators
1151: ${\alpha^{a}_{\mu}}^{+}, \alpha^{b}_{\nu}$ of the QCD gluon itself, which
1152: can be regarded somewhat like a tetrad field with respect to $G_{\mu\nu}$
1153: as a metric. For this to fit the formalism, we have to separate out the
1154: "rigid" piece (analogous to $e^{i}_{\mu} = {\delta}^{i}_{\mu} +
1155: h^{i}_{\mu}$ in the tetrad case). Here this is the "flat connection"
1156: $N^{a}_{\mu}$, i.e. the zero-mode of the field.
1157:
1158: The operators $T_{\mu\nu}$ and $U_{\mu\nu}$, together with the operators
1159: \begin{equation} S_{\mu\nu} = \eta_{ab} \int d{\tilde k}
1160: [{\alpha^{a}_{\mu}}^{+}(k) \alpha^{b}_{\nu}(k) - \alpha^{a}_{\mu}(k)
1161: {\alpha^{b}_{\nu}}^{+}(k)],
1162: \end{equation}
1163: close respectively on the algebras of $GL(4,R)$ and $U(1,3)$. Note that
1164: the largest (linearly realized) algebra with generators quadratic in the
1165: ${\alpha_{\mu}}^{+}, \ \alpha_{\mu}$ operators is the algebra of
1166: $Sp(4,R)$. This algebra contains both previous ones:
1167: \begin{equation}
1168: Sp(4,R) \supset \left\{ \begin{matrix} U(1,3) & \supset & SU(1,3) \\
1169: GL(4,R) & \supset & SL(4,R) \\
1170: T_{10}\wedge SO(1,3) & \supset & T_{9}\wedge SO(1,3)
1171: \end{matrix}\right\} \supset SO(1,3)
1172: \end{equation}
1173: The $GL(4,R)$ algebra represents a Spectrum-Generating Algebra for the
1174: set of hadron states of a given flavor. In the case of $U(1,3)$, when
1175: selecting a time-like vector (for massive states), the stability subgroup
1176: is $U(3)$, a compact group with finite representations -- as against the
1177: non-compact $SL(3,R)$ for $SL(4,R)$. This fits with a situation in nuclei
1178: in which the symmetries are physically realized over pairs of "valency"
1179: nucleons outside of closed shells, as in the case of IBM: there is a
1180: finite number of such pairs, and the excitations thus have to fit within
1181: finite representations.
1182:
1183:
1184: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1185:
1186:
1187: \bibitem{chromo} Dj. \v Sija\v cki and Y. Ne'eman, \emph{Phys. Lett. B}
1188: \textbf{247} (1990) 571.
1189:
1190: \bibitem{Fried} H.M. Fried, \emph{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{D27} (1983) 2956.
1191:
1192: \bibitem{Fradkin} E.S. Fradkin, \emph{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{76} (1966) 588.
1193:
1194: \bibitem{diff} Y. Ne'eman and Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{Int. J. Mod. Phys. A}
1195: \textbf{10} (1995) 4399; Y. Ne'eman and Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{Mod.
1196: Phys. Lett. A} \textbf{11} (1996) 217.
1197:
1198: \bibitem{wspin} Y. Ne'eman and Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{Phys. Lett. B}
1199: \textbf{157} (1985) 275; Y. Ne'eman and Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{Found.
1200: Phys.} \textbf{27} (1997) 1105; Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{Acta Phys. Pol.
1201: B} \textbf{29} (1998) 1089.
1202:
1203: \bibitem{we} J. Mickelsson, \emph{Commun. Math. Phys.} \textbf{88} (1983)
1204: 551; A. Cant and Y. Ne'eman, \emph{J. Math. Phys.} \textbf{26} (1985)
1205: 3180; Y. Ne'eman and Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{Phys. Lett. B}
1206: \textbf{157}(1985) 275.
1207:
1208: \bibitem{sl3} Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{J. Math. Phys.} \textbf{16}
1209: (1975) 298; Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{J. Math. Phys.} \textbf{31} (1990)
1210: 1872.
1211:
1212: \bibitem{sl4} Dj. \v Sija\v cki and Y. Ne'eman, \emph{J. Math. Phys.}
1213: \textbf{26} (1985) 2457; Dj. \v Sija\v cki, "Spinors for Particles,
1214: Gravity and Superstrings", in \emph{Spinors in Physics and Geometry}, A.
1215: Trautman and G. Furlan eds., World Scientific Pub., (1989) 191.
1216:
1217: \bibitem{hadrons} Y. Ne'eman and Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{Phys. Rev. D}
1218: \textbf{37} (1988) 3267; Y. Ne'eman and Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{Phys.
1219: Rev. D} \textbf{47} (1993) 4133.
1220:
1221: \bibitem{Jm2} Y. Ne'eman and Dj. \v Sija\v cki, \emph{Phys. Lett. B}
1222: \textbf{276} (1992) 173.
1223:
1224: \bibitem{mag} F.W. Hehl, G.D. Kerlick and P. von der Heyde, \emph{Phys.
1225: Lett.B} \textbf{63} (1976) 446; Y. Ne'eman and Dj. \v Sija\v cki,
1226: \emph{Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)} \textbf{120} (1979) 292; F.W. Hehl, J.D. McCrea,
1227: E.W. Mielke and Y. Ne'eman, \emph{Phys. Rep.} \textbf{258} (1995) 1.
1228:
1229: \bibitem{ibm} Dj. \v Sija\v cki and Y. Ne'eman, \emph{Phys. Lett. B}
1230: \textbf{250} (1990) 1.
1231:
1232: \end{thebibliography}
1233:
1234:
1235: \end{document}
1236: