1: \documentclass[aps,superscriptaddress,preprint,showpacs]{revtex4}
2: %\documentstyle[12pt,epsfig,colordvi]{article}
3: %\documentclass[aps,superscriptaddress,preprint,showkeys,showpacs,nofootinbib]{revtex4}
4: %\textheight=21.5cm
5: %\textwidth=16cm
6: %\topmargin=0cm
7: %\oddsidemargin=0cm
8: %\evensidemargin=0cm
9: \usepackage{bm}
10: \usepackage{dcolumn}
11: \usepackage{epsfig}
12:
13: \begin{document}
14:
15: \title{Meson-Meson Interactions and Resonances in
16: the 't Hooft Model}
17:
18: \author{Zolt$\acute{{\rm a}}$n Batiz}
19: \author{M. T. Pe${\tilde{\rm n}}$a}
20: \affiliation{Centro de F\'\i sica das Intera\c c\~oes Fundamentais\\ and
21: Department of Physics, Instituto Superior T$\acute{e}$cnico, Av. Rovisco Pais
22: 1049-001, Lisboa, Portugal}
23: \author{A.~Stadler}
24: \affiliation{
25: Centro de F\'{\i}sica Nuclear da Universidade de
26: Lisboa, Av. Gama Pinto 2, P-1649-003 Lisboa, Portugal}
27: \affiliation{
28: Departamento de F\'\i sica, Universidade de \'Evora,
29: Col\'egio Lu\'\i s Verney, P-7000-671 \'Evora, Portugal}
30:
31:
32: \date{\today}
33:
34: \begin{abstract}
35: We studied meson-meson interactions using the 't Hooft model, which represents QCD in
36: $1+1$ dimensions and assumes a large number of colors ($N_c$). The dominant
37: interactions in this large $N_c$ limit are generated by quark exchange. Our
38: results show that QCD in $1+1$ dimensions allows the realization of a
39: constituent-type quark model for the mesons, and generates a scalar ``$\sigma$''-like
40: meson-meson resonance, whose effective coupling and mass are determined by the
41: underlying QCD dynamics. These results suggest an interpretation of the lightest scalar mesons
42: as $q\bar{q} q \bar{q}$ systems.
43: \end{abstract}
44: \pacs{13.75.Lb, 13.75.-n, 12.38.-t}
45:
46: \keywords{'t Hooft model, QCD, quarks, mesons,
47: resonances}
48:
49: \maketitle
50:
51: \section{Introduction}
52: \label{sec:introduction}
53: \noindent
54: At low energies, systems which are due to, or interact through, the strong
55: nuclear interaction may be described by effective field theories, examples of
56: which are Quantum Hadrodynamics (QHD) \cite{Walecka} and Chiral Perturbation
57: Theory \cite{gary}), or simple constituent quark models \cite {Isgur}. With
58: more or less phenomenological content, those frameworks are in general very
59: successful, but there are still questions not completely answered.
60:
61: For instance, whether the nature of the broad $\sigma$ meson corresponds
62: truly to a simple quark structure, or to a resonance in the meson-meson
63: dynamics, or to an unusual quark structure as a meson-glueball combination,
64: or even to some combination of these, is still an open issue. Models of QCD did
65: not yet resolve this question quantitatively. In general for the light scalar
66: mesons, arguments have been advanced for the importance of a $q\bar q q \bar q$
67: component \cite{Close} at short distances, compatible with a dominant
68: meson-meson component at large distances.
69: A very recent lattice calculation
70: \cite{Jaffe} also indicates that
71: a $q \bar q q \bar q$ bound state may exist, just below threshold in
72: the non-exotic channel of pseudoscalar-pseudoscalar s-wave scattering.
73:
74: In this work we apply the 't Hooft model \cite{thooft}, a formulation
75: of QCD in 1+1 dimensions and in the large $N_c$ limit, to the meson-meson
76: scattering process. The 't Hooft model has no physical gluons, thus it
77: includes no glueballs. Furthermore, due to the large $N_c$ limit, quark
78: exchange dominates gluon exchange and only a finite number of diagrams
79: contribute. Since the finite sum of regular contributing diagrams is unable to
80: produce a pole at real energies, no meson-meson bound states can be produced.
81:
82: However, while meson-meson bound states are excluded in this framework, complex
83: energy resonant states should still be possible. It is the purpose of this
84: paper to calculate the meson-meson scattering amplitude based on meson-$q \bar
85: q$ vertex functions obtained in the 't Hooft model, and to look for low-lying
86: resonances. As we will show, the 't Hooft model
87: indeed supports the existence of
88: meson-meson resonances, suggesting the relevance of the $q \bar{q}
89: q \bar{q}$ structure for the light scalar mesons.
90:
91:
92: A calculation of $\pi-\pi$ forward and backward scattering in the Dyson-Schwinger,
93: Bethe-Salpeter approach and in the rainbow-ladder approximation was presented in Ref.\
94: \cite{Cotanch}. It uses an effective $q\bar q$ interaction and incorporates features
95: of QCD. Based on this approach, a scalar meson emerges as a resonance in $\pi-\pi$
96: scattering. However, the calculation is performed using the Euclidian metric. In our
97: work, while simplifying the problem by working in 1+1 dimensions, we use the Minkowski
98: metric througout.
99:
100: Clearly, a model in 1+1 dimensions is limited in its scope, and one has to be
101: very cautious when comparing its results to phenomena in the real world.
102: Nevertheless, for kinematic conditions of scattering processes with a
103: negligible component of the momentum transfer in the transverse direction, we
104: may conjecture that the 't Hooft model, and thus the calculation presented
105: here, has the main features of realistic microscopic QCD, and that its results
106: are valid at least qualitatively.
107:
108: Section \ref{S:form} reviews the model and introduces the calculational framework.
109: Section \ref{mmscat} presents the input for the description of the meson-meson scattering
110: transition amplitude. Section \ref{S:results} shows the results,
111: and section \ref{S:conclusions} presents the conclusions.
112:
113: \section{Formalism}
114: \label{S:form}
115:
116: \subsection{ The `t Hooft model and the choice of gauge}
117: This work models the meson-meson interaction using the 't Hooft model. Here
118: we review briefly the dynamics of this model by starting
119: with the corresponding Lagrangian. Subsequently, we write the equations
120: that we solved for the one body (quark propagator) and two body
121: (quark-antiquark bound state) problems.
122:
123:
124: The
125: QCD Lagrangian is
126: %
127: \begin{equation}
128: {\cal L}=-\frac{1}{4}Tr \left[ G^{\mu \nu}G_{\mu \nu} \right]+
129: \bar{q}\left(i D_{\mu} \gamma^{\mu}-m_0\right)q \, ,
130: \label{1eq1}
131: \end{equation}
132: %
133: with the notation
134: %
135: \begin{eqnarray}
136: A^{\mu}=&&A^{\mu}_a \frac{\lambda_a}{2} \, , \nonumber\\
137: G_{\mu \nu}=&&\partial_{\mu} A_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu} A_{\mu}
138: +i\alpha \left[ A_{\mu},A_{\nu} \right] \, ,\nonumber\\
139: D_{\mu}=&&\partial_{\mu}+i\alpha A_{\mu} \, ,
140: \label{1eq2}
141: \end{eqnarray}
142: %
143: where $A^{\mu}_{a}$ are the gluon fields with the Lorentz index
144: $\mu$ and the color index $a$, the $\lambda_{a}$'s are
145: the generators of the $SU(N)$ color group, $G_{\mu \nu}$
146: is the field tensor, $q$ is the
147: quark field, $m_0$ is the bare quark mass and $\alpha$ is
148: the quark-gluon coupling strength. Following 't Hooft \cite{thooft},
149: the coupling strength $\alpha$
150: depends on the number of colors in the following way:
151: \begin{equation}
152: \alpha=\frac{g}{\sqrt{N_c}} \, .
153: \label{1eq2a}
154: \end{equation}
155:
156: Introducing for an arbitrary two-vector $b$ the light cone variables:
157: %
158: \begin{eqnarray}
159: b_{+}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(b^0+b^1) \, ,\nonumber \\
160: b_{-}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(b^0-b^1) \, ,
161: \label{1eq3}
162: \end{eqnarray}
163: %
164: the scalar product of any two vectors $a$ and $b$ becomes
165: $a_{+}b_{-}+a_{-}b_{+}$, and the derivatives correspond to
166: \begin{eqnarray}
167: \partial_{-}=&&\frac{\partial}{\partial x_+}=
168: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\partial^0-\partial^1)=
169: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\frac{\partial}{\partial x^0}+
170: \frac{\partial}{\partial x^1}) \, , \nonumber \\
171: \partial_{+}=&&\frac{\partial}{\partial x_+}=
172: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\partial^0+\partial^1)=
173: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\frac{\partial}{\partial x^0}-
174: \frac{\partial}{\partial x^1}) \, .
175: \end{eqnarray}
176: In the same way, the $+$ and $-$ components
177: of the $\gamma$ matrices are defined. The anticommutation relations read
178: %
179: \begin{eqnarray}
180: \{ \gamma_-, \gamma_- \}=\{ \gamma_+, \gamma_+ \}=0 \, , \nonumber \\
181: \{ \gamma_+, \gamma_- \}=2 \, .
182: \end{eqnarray}
183: %
184: In the light cone variables, the nonvanishing components
185: of the field strength tensor are
186: %
187: \begin{equation}
188: G_{+-}=-G_{-+}=\partial_+A_- -\partial_
189: -A_+ +i\alpha[A_-,A_+] \, ,
190: \end{equation}
191: %
192: so that the free gauge field Lagrangian becomes
193: %
194: \begin{equation}
195: {\cal L}_{free}=\frac{1}{2}G_{+-}^2 \, .
196: \end{equation}
197: %
198:
199: %
200: We choose to work in the light
201: cone gauge, $A_{-}=0$, so that the commutator contained in the
202: field tensor $G_{+-}$ disappears. Moreover,
203: since we consider only two dimensions,
204: we do not have any physical gluonic degrees of freedom. In addition, because
205: of the gauge condition, there is only one degree of freedom left.
206: Consequently, the gluonic field is not a
207: dynamical variable and does not couple to ghosts any longer.
208:
209: In this parametrization the Lagrangian (\ref{1eq1}) becomes
210: %
211: \begin{equation}
212: {\cal L}=\frac{1}{2} Tr \left[(\partial_-
213: A_{+})^2 \right] +
214: \bar{q}\left(i \partial_+
215: \gamma_- +i \partial_- \gamma_+ -\alpha \gamma_{-}A_{+} -m_0 \right)q \, .
216: \label{1eq4}
217: \end{equation}
218: %
219: Before quantizing the theory given by this Lagrangian,
220: we calculate the gluonic field. The equation
221: of motion related to this field is
222: %
223: \begin{equation}
224: (\frac{\partial}{\partial x_+})^2 A_{+}= - \alpha \bar{q} \gamma_{-} q \, .
225: \label{1eq5}
226: \end{equation}
227: %
228: The solution of Eq. (\ref{1eq5}) is
229: %
230: \begin{equation}
231: A_{+}(x_{+},x_{-})= - \alpha \int dy_{+} \bar{q}
232: (y_{+},x_{-}) \gamma_{-} q(y_{+},x_{-})
233: {\cal G}(y_{+}-x_{+}) \, ,
234: \label{1eq6}
235: \end{equation}
236: %
237: where the Green's function ${\cal G}$ is given by
238: %
239: \begin{equation}
240: {\cal G}(y_{+}-x_{+})=|y_{+}-x_{+}|+c_1(y_{+}-x_{+})+c_2 \, .
241: \label{1eq7}
242: \end{equation}
243: %
244: The coefficients $c_1$ and $c_2$ are free parameters.
245: This means that the gauge
246: condition did not eliminate all the redundant degrees of freedom,
247: just as the Coulomb or Lorentz gauge do not determine uniquely the photon
248: propagator in QED (Gribov ambiguity). We can therefore set the
249: coefficients $c_1$ and $c_2$
250: equal to zero
251: in order to simplify our calculations.
252:
253: The Fourier transform of the Green's function (\ref{1eq7})
254: gives the gluon ``propagator'', or more precisely the
255: momentum dependence of the effective quark-quark interaction:
256: %
257: \begin{equation}
258: D(k) = D(k_-)=\frac{1}{k_-^2}-\delta{(k_-)}
259: {\cal P}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{d \ell_-}{\ell^2_-} \, .
260: \label{1eq8}
261: \end{equation}
262:
263: The second term in Eq. (\ref{1eq8}) was first considered
264: by Gross and Milana \cite{GROSS1}, in the different context
265: of a quasi-potential two-body equation for the quark-antiquark system.
266: It makes the potential $A_+$ finite everywhere.
267:
268: From this point we proceed to solve the one body equation
269: for the quark propagator.
270:
271: \subsection{Quark Dyson-Schwinger equation}
272: \label{S:qdse}
273:
274: The (undressed)
275: fermion propagator is
276: %
277: \begin{equation}
278: S_0(k)=\frac{k_- \gamma_+ + k_+ \gamma_- +m_0}
279: {2 k_+ k_- - m_0^2 + i \epsilon} \, ,
280: \label{1eq9}
281: \end{equation}
282: %
283: and the quark-gluon interaction is
284: \begin{equation}
285: -i {\cal V}=-i\alpha \gamma_- \, .
286: \label{1eq10}
287: \end{equation}
288:
289: We determine the dressed single quark propagator $S(p)$
290: using the (one body) Dyson-Schwinger equation (DSE),
291: %
292: \begin{eqnarray}
293: &&S(p)=S_0(p)+i g^2 S(p)\bigl[{\cal P} \int\,\frac{d^2k}{(2\pi)^2}\,
294: D(k-p)\,\gamma_- S(k)\gamma_ - \bigr]S_{0}(p) \, ,
295: \label{DSE}
296: \end{eqnarray}
297: %
298: which we show also graphically in Fig. \ref{ds}.
299: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
300: \begin{figure}[hbt]
301: \centerline{\epsfig{file=AS-ds.eps,width=5.0in}}
302: \caption{The quark Dyson-Schwinger equation. The
303: curly line represents the strong
304: interaction, the thin line the unperturbed quark propagator, and
305: the solid line represents the dressed quark propagator.}
306: \label{ds}
307: \end{figure}
308: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
309:
310: Since for every internal loop there
311: is a factor of $\alpha^2=g^2/N_c$, and a multiplicative factor of $N_c$, the
312: color dependence disappears. The vertex corrections and the quark-gluon
313: vertices do not have a multiplicative factor, being
314: supressed in the large $N_c$ limit. Therefore, in this limit the rainbow
315: approximation (undressed vertices and the
316: absence of the quark loops
317: from the gluon propagator) is justified
318: \cite{thooft}.
319:
320: In Eq. (\ref{DSE}) $d^2k=dk_-dk_+$, and since $D(k)$ does
321: not depend on $k_+$, the principal part ${\cal P} \int d^2 k $
322: does not depend on $p_+$. This allows
323: the following parametrization of the full
324: quark propagator,
325: %
326: \begin{equation}
327: S(p)=\frac{p_- \gamma_+ + \left(p_+ -
328: \frac{\Sigma(p_-)}{2} \right) \gamma_- +m_0}
329: {2p_-\left(p_+ - \frac{\Sigma(p_-)}{2 } \right)-m_0^2+i \epsilon} \, ,
330: \label{1eq11}
331: \end{equation}
332: %
333: where the self-energy contribution $\Sigma$,
334: originated by ${\cal P} \int d^2 k $, depends only on
335: $k_-$:
336:
337: \begin{equation}
338: \Sigma(p_-)=-\frac{4g^2}{(2 \pi)^2 i} {\cal P}\int dk_-dk_+ D(k_- - p_-)
339: \frac{k_-}{2k_-k_+ -k_- \Sigma(k_-)-m_0^2+i \epsilon} \, .
340: \label{1eq12}
341: \end{equation}
342: %
343: Performing the $k_+$ integral first one obtains
344: %
345: \begin{equation}
346: \int dk_+ \frac{k_-}{2k_-k_+ -k_- \Sigma(k_-)-m_0^2+i \epsilon}=
347: -\frac{i \pi}{2} \mathrm{sgn}(k_-) \, .
348: \label{1eq13}
349: \end{equation}
350: %
351: Substituting this result back into Eq.\ (\ref{1eq12}) one finds that
352: %
353: \begin{equation}
354: \Sigma(p_-)=\frac{g^2}{2 \pi p_-}{\cal P} \int dk_- D(k_- - p_-)
355: \mathrm{sgn}(p_-) \, .
356: \label{1eq14}
357: \end{equation}
358: %
359: Using Eq.\ (\ref{1eq8}) for $D(k_- - p_-)$ and
360: performing the integral we get
361: %
362: \begin{equation}
363: \Sigma(p_-)=-\frac{g^2}{\pi p_-} \, .
364: \label{1eq15}
365: \end{equation}
366: %
367: This, in combination with Eq.\ (\ref{1eq11}) results in
368: %
369: \begin{equation}
370: S(p)=\frac{(p_+ +\frac{g^2}{2 p_- \pi} ) \gamma_- + p_- \gamma_+ + m_0 }
371: {2 p_+p_- - (m_0^2-\frac{g^2}{\pi} -i \epsilon)} \, .
372: \label{1eq16}
373: \end{equation}
374: %
375: Note that the masspole has been shifted:
376: %
377: \begin{equation}
378: m_{0}^2 \rightarrow m^2 = m_{0}^2 - \frac{g^2}{\pi}.
379: \label{1eq17}
380: \end{equation}
381: %
382: Having obtained the dressed propagator,
383: we are ready to proceed to the next stage, namely the calculation
384: of the $q$-$\bar q$ bound state.
385:
386: \subsection{Two-body bound states}
387: \label{S:2bs}
388:
389: In the following, we label
390: the dressed quark mass by $m_1$. As for
391: the antiquark (which might have a
392: different flavor), we label its
393: dressed mass by $m_2$.
394: The total momentum of the bound state is denoted by
395: $r$ and the momentum of the quark by $p$.
396: The momentum of the antiquark
397: is then $r-p$.
398:
399: The bound state wave function $\Gamma(p,r)$ is given by the
400: Bethe-Salpeter equation (also shown graphically in Fig. \ref{bs}),
401: %
402: \begin{equation}
403: \Gamma(p,r)=i g^2 {\cal P} \int
404: \frac{d^2 k}{(2 \pi)^2}D(k_-)
405: \gamma_- S_2(p+k-r)
406: \Gamma(p+k,r) S_1(p+k) \gamma_- \, ,
407: \label{BSE}
408: \end{equation}
409: %
410: where $S_1$ and $S_2$ are the quark-
411: and the antiquark propagators, respectively.
412: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
413: \begin{figure}[bt]
414: \centerline{\epsfig{file=AS-bs.eps,width=6.0in}}
415: \caption{The Bethe-Salpeter equation for the $q \bar{q}$ bound state.}
416: \label{bs}
417: \end{figure}
418: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
419: With the substitution $\Gamma(p,r)=
420: \gamma_- \psi(p,r)$ \cite{thooft} Eq.\ (\ref{BSE}) becomes
421: %
422: \begin{equation}
423: \psi(p,r)=i (2g)^2 {\cal P} \int
424: \frac{d^2k}{(2 \pi)^2}
425: \frac{D(k_-)(p+k)_- (p+k-r)_- \psi(p+k,r)}
426: {\left[(p+k)^2-m_1^2 \right] \left[(p+k-r)^2-m_2^2 \right]} \, .
427: \label{2eq1}
428: \end{equation}
429: %
430: The equal $x_-$ wave function is defined in the following fashion:
431: %
432: \begin{equation}
433: \varphi(p_-,r_-)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dp_+
434: \frac{p_-(p-r)_-\psi(p,r)}{(p^2-m_1^2) \left[(p-r)^2-m_2^2 \right]} \, .
435: \label{2eq2}
436: \end{equation}
437: %
438: By substituting this into Eq.\ (\ref{2eq1}) one gets
439: %
440: \begin{equation}
441: \psi(p,r)=\frac{g^2}{-i \pi^2} {\cal P} \int
442: dk_- D(k_-) \varphi(p_-+k_-,r_-) \, .
443: \label{2eq3}
444: \end{equation}
445: %
446: Note that $\psi(p,r)$ does not depend on $p_+$.
447: Multiplying both sides of the former equation by
448: $[p_-(p-r)_-]/[(p^2-m_1^2)((p-r)^2-m_2^2)]$ and integrating over $p_+$
449: we consider the
450: two poles in the complex $p_+$-plane,
451: namely $k_1=\frac{m_1^2}{2p_-}-i \epsilon \mathrm{sgn}(p_-)$ and
452: $k_2=\frac{m_2^2}{2(p_- - r_-)}-i \epsilon \mathrm{sgn}(p_- - r_-)$.
453: If both of them are in the same half plane the integral over $p_+$ is
454: zero, because the sum of the two residues is zero.
455: If the first pole is in the upper half-plane and the second one is
456: in the lower half-plane (which means that $p_- <0$ and $p_- - r_->0$)
457: the integral is $2 \pi i/(k_1-k_2)=2 \pi i \theta(-p_-)
458: \theta(p_- - r_-)/(k_1-k_2)$. If the second pole is in the upper half-plane
459: and the first one is in the lower half
460: plane the integral is $-2 \pi i \theta(p_-)
461: \theta(-p_- + r_-)/(k_1-k_2)$. Combining these two cases one obtains
462: %
463: \begin{equation}
464: \varphi(p,r)=\frac{\pi i}{2}
465: \frac{\theta(-p_-) \theta(p_- - r_-) - \theta(p_-) \theta(r_- - p_-)}
466: {\frac{m_1^2}{2p_-}-\frac{m_2^2}{2(p_- -r_-)}-r_+}
467: \psi(p,r) \, .
468: \label{2eq4}
469: \end{equation}
470: %
471: Whenever the combination of the $\theta$
472: functions does not vanish, it is easy to invert this relation:
473: %
474: \begin{equation}
475: \psi(p,r)=\frac{2}{\pi i}
476: \left(\theta(-p_-) \theta(p_- - r_-) - \theta(p_-) \theta(r_- - p_-) \right)
477: \left( \frac{m_1^2}{2p_-}-\frac{m_2^2}{2(p_- -r_-)}-r_+ \right)
478: \varphi(p,r) \, .
479: \label{2eq4a}
480: \end{equation}
481: %
482: Whenever this condition does not stand, we have to use
483: Eq.\ (\ref{2eq3}) to compute $\psi$ from $\varphi$.
484: Note that
485: $\varphi$ has been normalized to $1/\sqrt{N_c}$ in order
486: to get the correct charge normalization.
487:
488: In order to determine $\varphi$,
489: we transform Eq.\ (\ref{2eq2}) into a form suitable for a
490: numerical calculation.
491: The
492: $\theta$ functions limit the range of $p_-$ to $0<p_-<r_-$, and
493: for real particles only positive values for $r_+$ must be considered.
494: After some algebraic manipulations,
495: Eq.\ (\ref{2eq4}) becomes
496: %
497: \begin{equation}
498: \mu^2 \varphi(x,r)= \left(\frac{\alpha_1}
499: {x}+\frac{\alpha_2}{1-x} \right) \varphi(x,r)
500: -{\cal P} \int_0^1 dy \frac{\varphi(y,r)-\varphi(x,r)}{(y-x)^2} \, ,
501: \label{2eq8}
502: \end{equation}
503: where the following notation was introduced:
504: %
505: \begin{equation}
506: \mu^2=\frac{2 \pi r_+r_-}{g^2} \, , \qquad
507: \alpha_1=\frac{\pi m_1^2}{g^2} \, , \qquad
508: \alpha_2=\frac{\pi m_2^2}{g^2} \, , \qquad
509: x=\frac{p_-}{r_-} \, , \qquad
510: y=\frac{k_-}{r_-} \, .
511: \label{2eq6}
512: \end{equation}
513: %
514:
515: We solve the integral equation (\ref{2eq8}) numerically. The wave function is
516: expanded in cubic splines (since the wave function $\varphi$ is defined only
517: in the range between $x=0$ and $x=1$, the boundary condition that they vanish
518: at the limits of this interval is imposed). The resulting linear matrix
519: equation for the expansion coefficients was solved with standard eigenvalue
520: routines.
521:
522: In the limit $m_{01}=m_{02}=0$, Eq.\ (\ref{2eq8}) yields a ground state of
523: zero mass, and thus is consistent with chiral symmetry. To generate a solution
524: that is related to the pion in the real world, we searched for a bound state
525: solution of Eq.\ (\ref{2eq8}) with a mass of $140$ MeV. To obtain such a
526: solution, we varied the bare mass $m_{01}$ of one of the quarks. For
527: simplicity, the second quark mass $m_{02}$ was not taken as an independent
528: free model parameter but determined by assuming a fixed mass ratio
529: $\frac{m_{01}}{m_{02}}=3/4$, which lies within the accepted range between
530: $0.2$ and $0.8$ \cite{PDG}.
531: The coupling parameter $g$ and the dressed masses $m_1$ and $m_2$ were adjusted accordingly,
532: through Eqs.(\ref{2eq8}), (\ref{2eq6}) and (\ref{1eq17}).
533:
534: We represent in Fig.\ \ref{1stmass} the values of the bare quark mass $m_{01}$,
535: as a function
536: of the coupling strength $g$, which generate
537: a bound state with a mass of $140$ MeV.
538: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
539: \begin{figure}[bt]
540: \vspace{5mm}
541: \centerline{\epsfig{file=1stmass.eps,width=8cm}}
542: \caption{The bare mass (solid line) and the dressed mass (dashed line)
543: of the first quark, as a function of
544: the strong coupling constant $g$,
545: with the constraints that the pion mass is $140$ MeV
546: and the ratio $m_{01}/m_{02}=3/4$.}
547: \label{1stmass}
548: \end{figure}
549: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
550: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
551: The bare masses are found to depend linearly
552: on $g$. The slope and the $y$-axis intercept
553: of the numerical straight line on Fig.
554: \ref{1stmass} are easily
555: determined through a fit, with the result
556: \begin{equation}
557: m_{01}=60.57
558: -0.178 \, g \quad {\rm MeV} \, .
559: \end{equation}
560: With the help of Eq.\ (\ref{1eq17})
561: we can also predict
562: the dependence of the dressed masses
563: on $g$ from the curves for the bare masses.
564: Therefore, in the 't Hooft model the dressed masses are given as the
565: following functions of $g$:
566: \begin{eqnarray}
567: m_{1}^2 &=&(60.57
568: -0.178 \phantom{q} g)^2-\frac{g^2}{\pi} \phantom{q}{\rm MeV}^2 \, \nonumber\\
569: m_{2}^2 &=&(80.76
570: -0.24 \phantom{q} g)^2-\frac{g^2}{\pi} \phantom{q}{\rm MeV}^2 \, .
571: \end{eqnarray}
572: We can also determine the largest value of $g$, such that each dressed mass
573: is physical, i.e., not imaginary.
574: For the first flavor
575: this happens at $g=81.64$ MeV, while for the second flavor at
576: $g=100.8$ MeV. The first value is therefore the largest possible for
577: $g$, such the 't Hooft model may support a constituent quark model
578: interpretation, where the dressed masses correspond to constituent quark
579: masses.
580:
581:
582: \section{Meson-meson scattering}
583: \label{mmscat}
584:
585: In this section we consider the meson-meson elastic scattering
586: amplitude. We continue
587: to assume two different flavors for the quarks, whose dressed masses
588: are $m_1$ and $m_2$, and we consider the lowest $q\bar{q}$ bound state only.
589:
590:
591: The diagrams that dominate in the large $N_c$ limit are
592: the quark exchange box diagram, represented in Fig. \ref{box},
593: and the quark exchange crossbox diagram, represented in Fig. \ref{crossbox}.
594: In the center of mass system, the
595: momenta of the ingoing mesons are $P=(P^0,P^1)=(\sqrt{\mu^2+p^2},p)$ and
596: ${\tilde P}=({\tilde P}^0,{\tilde P}^1)=(\sqrt{\mu^2+p^2},-p)$,
597: where $\mu$ is the mass of the
598: meson and $p$ the relative momentum. The outgoing particles then have
599: the same (but interchanged) momenta.
600:
601: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
602: \begin{figure}[tb]
603: \centerline{\epsfig{file=box.eps,width=6cm}}
604: \caption{The quark-exchange box diagram. The vertex
605: functions are represented by filled
606: circles, and the mesons by double lines.
607: The power counting from the vertices is explicitely shown.
608: An extra factor of $N_c$ comes from the color summation in the internal loop.}
609: \label{box}
610: \end{figure}
611: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
612:
613: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
614: \begin{figure}[hbt]
615: \centerline{\epsfig{file=crossbox.eps,width=6cm}}
616: \caption{The quark-exchange crossed box diagram. As in Fig.\ \ref{box},
617: the power
618: counting factors are explicitely shown.
619: An extra factor $N_c$ comes from the color summation in the internal loop.}
620: \label{crossbox}
621: \end{figure}
622: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
623:
624: Both diagrams are symmetrized in terms of the outgoing states.
625: Similar diagrams which are obtained
626: from the former ones by interchanging $m_1$ and $m_2$ in the
627: intermediate state are also
628: considered. There are a total of eight diagrams which were calculated.
629: When there is only one quark flavor, one does not need to interchange
630: the two masses and there are only four diagrams.
631: The sum of these
632: diagrams is proportional to $1/N_c$.
633:
634: As for the gluon exchange diagrams, such as in Fig. \ref{gluonexchange},
635: they are suppressed in the large $N_c$ limit by a
636: factor of $1/N_c$ compared to the
637: quark exchange terms.
638:
639: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
640: \begin{figure}[tb]
641: \centerline{\epsfig{file=gluonexchange.eps,width=6cm}}
642: \caption{The gluon exchange diagram. Power
643: counting is shown as previously. For this purpose the
644: gluon line is represented as two parallel quark lines.
645: An extra factor $N_c$ comes from the color summation in the internal loop.}
646: \label{gluonexchange}
647: \end{figure}
648: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
649:
650: Since the vertex function is independent of the
651: $+$ component of the relative momentum,
652: the momentum integral in the loops of Figs. \ref{box} and \ref{crossbox}
653: is simplified: we can first integrate the propagator products over
654: $k_+$ analytically, and then perform numerically the second integration over
655: $k_-$, which includes now the vertex functions.
656:
657: As an illustrative example, we demonstrate the calculation of the box diagram
658: (Fig. \ref{box}) in greater detail.
659:
660: The corresponding scattering amplitude is
661: \begin{eqnarray}
662: {\cal M}_\mathrm{box}&=&\int_{\infty}^{\infty} d k_-
663: \int_{\infty}^{\infty} d k_+
664: \psi(-k,-P)
665: \psi(k,{\tilde P}) \psi(P + {\tilde P}-k,P)
666: \psi(k-P-{\tilde P},-{\tilde P}) \nonumber\\
667: & \times & \frac{1}{k_+-\frac{m_1^2}{2k_-}+i \epsilon \, \mathrm{sgn}(k_-)}
668: \frac{1}{k_+ - {\tilde P}_- - \frac{m_2^2}{2(k_- - {\tilde P}_-)}+i
669: \epsilon \, \mathrm{sgn}(k_- - {\tilde P}_-)} \nonumber\\
670: & \times & \frac{1}{k_+ - P_+ - {\tilde P}_+ - \frac{m_1^2}
671: {2(k_- - P_- - {\tilde P}_-)}+
672: i \epsilon \, \mathrm{sgn}(k_- - P_- - {\tilde P}_-)} \nonumber\\
673: & \times & \frac{1}{k_+ - P_+ - \frac{m_2^2}{2(k_- - P_-)}
674: +i \epsilon \, \mathrm{sgn}(k_- - P_-)} \, .
675: \label{4eq1}
676: \end{eqnarray}
677: The propagators have four poles:
678: \begin{eqnarray}
679: k_1 &=& \frac{m_1^2}{2k_-}-i \epsilon \, \mathrm{sgn}(k_-) \, ,\nonumber\\
680: k_2 &=& {\tilde P}_+ + \frac{m_2^2}{2(k_- - {\tilde P}_-)} -i
681: \epsilon \, \mathrm{sgn}(k_- - {\tilde P}_-) \, ,\nonumber\\
682: k_3 &=& P_+ + {\tilde P}_+ + \frac{m_1^2}{2(k_- - P_- - {\tilde P}_-)}-
683: i \epsilon \, \mathrm{sgn}(k_- - P_- - {\tilde P}_-) \, ,\nonumber\\
684: k_4 &=& P_++\frac{m_2^2}{2(k_- - P_-)}-i \epsilon \,
685: \mathrm{sgn}(k_- - P_-) \, .
686: \label{4eq2}
687: \end{eqnarray}
688: In order to perform the $k_+$ integration, one needs
689: to close the contour in the complex plane and consider the residues of all
690: poles inside the contour.
691: There are $16$ different possible combinations
692: of signs of the imaginary parts of the poles.
693: Some of these cases can be excluded, because they correspond to
694: values of $k_-$ which make the $k_+$ integral vanish.
695:
696: For instance, a
697: pole $k_1$ in the upper half plane implies that the pole $k_2$
698: cannot be in the lower half-plane,
699: otherwise one would have $k_- > \tilde{P}_-=
700: (\sqrt{\mu^2+p^2}+p)/\sqrt{2}>0$, in contradiction with the initial
701: hypothesis $k_{-}<0$.
702: Likewise the poles $k_3$ and $k_4$ cannot be in the lower half-plane
703: either. Therefore, if $k_1$ is in the upper half-plane,
704: the other 3 poles are also in the upper half plane. This would imply the
705: $k_+$ integral to vanish, since one may close the contour
706: below the $k_+$ axis. Therefore we can exclude
707: the case when $k_1$ is in the upper half plane.
708:
709: After a detailed analysis one finds that there
710: are only three cases that have a non-vanishing contribution to the integral:
711: (i) only $k_3$ is in the upper half plane,
712: (ii) the poles $k_2$ and $k_3$ are in the upper half plane,
713: (iii) only $k_1$ is in the lower half plane.
714: As for case (i), it implies $k_- > {\tilde P}_-$
715: and $k_-< P_- + {\tilde P}_-$.
716: Under these
717: circumstances, $\psi(P+{\tilde P}-k,P)=\frac{2}{\pi i} (k_3-k_2)|_{\epsilon=0}
718: \varphi((P+{\tilde P}-k)_-/P_-)$ and $\psi(k-P-{\tilde P},-{\tilde P})
719: =\frac{2}{\pi i}
720: (k_2-k_1)|_{\epsilon=0} \varphi((P+{\tilde P}-k)_-/{{\tilde P}_-})$,
721: due to Eq.~ (\ref{2eq4a}),
722: while the other vertex functions have to be
723: evaluated using Eq.~(\ref{2eq3}).
724: The contribution from case (i) becomes
725: \begin{eqnarray}
726: {\cal M}_\mathrm{box}|_1 &=& -2 \pi i \left( \frac{2}{\pi} \right)^2
727: \int_{{\tilde P}_-}^{{\tilde P}_- + P_-} d k_-
728: \frac{1}{(k_3-k_4)|_{\epsilon=0}} \nonumber\\
729: \times && \varphi(\frac{(P+{\tilde P}-k)_-}{{P_-}})
730: \varphi(\frac{(P+{\tilde P}-k)_-}
731: {{\tilde P}_-}) \psi(-k,-P) \psi(k,{\tilde P}) \, .
732: \label{eq36}
733: \end{eqnarray}
734: This integral is computed numerically. We treat the other two cases
735: in a similar fashion.
736:
737: We note that the amplitude of Eq.\ (\ref{eq36})
738: vanishes in the chiral limit, which supports
739: that the ground state
740: solution for the $q {\bar q}$ system has features of the pion.
741: Indeed, since in the chiral limit Eq.\ (\ref{2eq8}) gives
742: $\mu=0$, one has $P_-=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\sqrt{\mu^2+p^2}-p)=0$,
743: implying that the two integration limits in (\ref{eq36}) coincide,
744: and therefore
745: the amplitude vanishes. The same
746: can be shown for the other terms of the amplitude not explicitly written
747: here.
748:
749: It is worth mentioning that we implemented stability tests
750: of the numerical results against the number of gridpoints,
751: the number of splines and the singularity regulator $\epsilon$
752: (the $k_+$ integral
753: of the propagators is singular). These checks proceeded by
754: imposing the following
755: criteria: doubling each of the mentioned parameters, the relative
756: change in the results should be less than 1\% .
757: Convergence is typically obtained for 440
758: gridpoints, 40 splines and $\epsilon= 10^{-2}$.
759:
760: \section{Results}
761: \label{S:results}
762:
763: The numerical calculation of the meson-meson scattering amplitude (section
764: \ref{mmscat}) starts with the evaluation of the two-body quark-antiquark
765: wavefunction from the Bethe-Salpeter equation (section \ref{S:2bs}).
766: In turn, this
767: demands as input the bare quark masses and the quark-gluon coupling constant
768: $g$ (section \ref{S:qdse}).
769:
770: We constructed four representative models which correspond to
771: four different choices of the quark-gluon coupling
772: constant and bare quark masses.
773: They are subjected to the constraint that the bound state mass of the
774: $q\bar q$ system is the pion mass $m_{\pi}$=140 MeV.
775:
776: \begin{center}
777: \begin{table}[bt]
778: \begin{ruledtabular}
779: \begin{tabular}{lcccc}
780: & Model I & Model II & Model III & Model IV \\
781: \hline
782: $g$ & 1 & 20.1 & 80 & 2500 \\
783: $m_{01}$ & 60.0 & 57.0 & 46.4 & 6.0 \\
784: $m_{02}$ & 80.0 & 76.1 & 61.8 & 5.0 \\
785: $m_1$ & 60.0 & 55.9 & 10.6 & - \\
786: $m_2$ & 80.0 & 75.2 & 42.2 & - \\
787: \hline
788: $m_r$ ($=E_R$) & 280.0 & 282.4 & 280.7 & 300.0 \\
789: $m_i$ & 4.4 & 68.6 & 80.7 & 139.3 \\
790: $\Gamma$ & 0.07 & 16.4 & 23.2 & 64.7 \\
791: \end{tabular}
792: \end{ruledtabular}
793: \caption{Constants and resonance parameters for models I--IV.
794: The first five lines show the
795: quark-gluon coupling constant, the bare the
796: dressed quark masses (the latter are unphysical in model
797: IV and thus not included). The following
798: lines are the results of the s-channel resonance fit using Eq.\ (\ref{3eq1}).
799: All parameters are in MeV.}
800: \label{models}
801: \end{table}
802: \end{center}
803:
804: The parameters defining the four models are shown in Table \ref{models}.
805: The organization
806: principle for these models is that, going from model I
807: to model IV, the quark-gluon
808: coupling constant increases and the quark masses decrease.
809:
810: In models I and II, the sum of the dressed quark masses is
811: close to the real pion mass. Consequently, they can be interpreted as
812: constituent quark masses in a constituent quark model for the ``pion'',
813: generated by QCD within the 't Hooft model assumptions.
814: However, this correspondence breaks down for large couplings,
815: as seen for the model considered next.
816:
817: In model III, the value of the coupling $g$ is chosen slightly
818: below the maximum value
819: determined in section 2 for a constituent quark
820: model interpretation, while in model IV
821: that maximum value is exceeded substantially. In
822: this last case, the dressed masses are
823: imaginary and thus not physical.
824:
825: Not surprisingly, the bare quark masses differ from the up and
826: down current quark masses
827: of QCD for all models. This is a known artifact of the 't
828: Hooft model: from Eq.\
829: (\ref{1eq17}) one can see that the mass shift due to the
830: dressing decreases the quark mass, instead of
831: increasing it as in 3+1 dimensional QCD.
832:
833: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
834: \begin{figure}[tb]
835: \centerline{\epsfig{file=wavefunction.eps,width=4in}}
836: \caption{Bethe-Salpeter $q \bar{q}$ wave functions for models I--IV.
837: $x=\frac{p_-}{r_-}$ is the momentum fraction (or Bjorken variable)
838: defined in Eq.\ (\ref{2eq6}).}
839: \label{wavefunctions}
840: \end{figure}
841: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
842:
843: Figure \ref{wavefunctions} shows the obtained Bethe-Salpeter $q\bar{q}$
844: wave functions for
845: each model. Clearly, the description of the quark-gluon vertices
846: varies considerably. The
847: wave functions are strongly peaked around $x$ close to 0.4 for
848: small values of $g$, while
849: for larger $g$ they become broader and more and more constant.
850: This behavior can be easily understood:
851: larger values of $g$ cause stronger attraction between quark
852: and antiquark, leading to a
853: tighter bound state and therefore a more spread out wave
854: function in momentum space.
855:
856: As described in the previous section, for each of these models we
857: calculated the meson-meson scattering amplitude, the squares of which are
858: displayed in Fig.\ \ref{F:results}. Since we are primarily interested in
859: their structure, the amplitudes have been scaled such that the maximum of
860: their absolute squares are equal to 1. In all four cases, we find a
861: resonance structure close to threshold.
862:
863: This feature could be a sign for the existence of a $q^2 \bar q^2$ bound
864: state, for which the lattice calculations of Ref.\ \cite{Jaffe} found
865: indications. We remind the reader that working in perturbation theory we
866: cannot generate a bound state directly, but it would be interesting to see
867: if in a non-perturbative extension of our calculation, such a bound state
868: would also emerge from the 't Hooft model.
869:
870: On the other hand, the experimentally observed resonances have energies well
871: above threshold. It may be necessary to include gluon exchange (not
872: considered in our calculation) and higher order quark exchange terms
873: in the expansion in powers of $1/N_c$ in order to achieve a description
874: resembling more closely the real world.
875:
876: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
877: \begin{figure}[tb] \begin{center} $\begin{array}{c@{\hspace{1cm}}c}
878: \epsfig{file=AS-model1-2.eps,width=2.80in} &
879: \epsfig{file=AS-model2-2.eps,width=2.8in} \\
880: \\ \epsfig{file=AS-model3-2.eps,width=2.8in} &
881: \epsfig{file=AS-model4-2.eps,width=2.8in} \\
882: \end{array}$ \caption{Absolute squares of
883: meson-meson scattering amplitudes for models I -- IV close to threshold
884: energies. A resonance structure is clearly visible. The solid lines are
885: obtained using the 't Hooft model, the dashed lines represent fits to a
886: simple resonance model. The amplitudes are scaled to 1 at their maximum.}
887: \label{F:results} \end{center} \end{figure}
888: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
889:
890: In order to determine approximately the position and width
891: of the resonance, we compare
892: the 't Hooft model amplitudes to a simple resonance model.
893: We calculate the amplitude
894: for an intermediate s-channel resonance at tree level,
895: the absolute square of which is
896: \begin{equation}
897: |{\cal M}|^2={\tilde g}^4\frac{1}{(s-m_r^2)^2+m_i^4} \, ,
898: \label{3eq1}
899: \end{equation}
900: where $m_r^2$ and $m_i^2$ are the real part
901: and the imaginary part of the
902: square of the resonance mass, respectively,
903: and ${\tilde g}$ is the effective meson-meson-``$\sigma$'' coupling constant.
904: We then fit the parameters of this simple model to best
905: reproduce the 't Hooft model
906: results.
907:
908:
909: In the non-relativistic limit, (\ref{3eq1}) becomes
910: \begin{equation}
911: |{\cal M}|^2 \rightarrow {\tilde g}^4\frac{\frac{1}{4E_R^2}}{(E-E_R)^2+
912: \frac{m_i^4}{4E_R^2}} \, .
913: \label{3eq1a}
914: \end{equation}
915: We can compare (\ref{3eq1a}) with the well-known Breit-Wigner form,
916: \begin{equation}
917: |{\cal M}|^2 \approx {\bar
918: g}^4\frac{\Gamma^2/4}{(E-E_R)^2+\Gamma^2/4} \, ,
919: \label{3eq2}
920: \end{equation}
921: where $E_R$ is the resonance energy, $\Gamma$
922: is its width, and ${\bar g}$ the corresponding coupling strength,
923: and simply read off the relations $\Gamma^2=m_i^4/m_r^2$ and $E_R=m_r$.
924:
925:
926: The parameters obtained in this way for all models are also displayed in Table
927: \ref{models}. We verified in an independent fit directly to the Breit-Wigner
928: form (\ref{3eq2}) that the parameters are not significantly altered in the
929: non-relativistic limit. For comparison, the mass of the ``real'' sigma
930: resonance is considered to be in the range of 400--1200 MeV, while its width
931: lies in the interval 600--1000 MeV \cite{PDG}. Clearly, one should not demand
932: too much from the 't Hooft model with its simplifying assumptions. However, we
933: consider it a significant finding that it predicts a low energy resonance at
934: all, based solely on the leading-order quark exchange diagrams.
935:
936: In all four cases, the resonance is located very close to threshold, and it is
937: very narrow. The width increases slowly with increasing quark-gluon coupling
938: strength. On the other hand, the resonance position remains more or less
939: unchanged as long as we restrict ourselves to models with real dressed masses
940: (models I to III). Only for model IV, whose coupling constant is considerably
941: larger, the resonance moves away from threshold to about 300 MeV.
942:
943: One might have expected the resonance energy to increase smoothly and in a more pronounced
944: manner with the quark-gluon coupling strength $g$. However, one has to keep in mind that the
945: included quark-exchange processes do not directly depend on $g$, but only indirectly through
946: changes of the vertex functions and of the dressed quark masses that appear in the quark
947: propagators. Owing to the already mentioned peculiar feature of the 't Hooft model that
948: dressed quark masses decrease with increasing coupling strength $g$, the latter tend to
949: decrease the resonance energy. Moreover, while a larger $g$ implies an effectively stronger
950: attraction between the two mesons -- once they overlap -- through the stronger quark-quark
951: attraction, the very probability of this overlap drops in turn, because the spatial size of
952: the mesons decreases. These effects seems to counterbalance each other to a large extent,
953: leaving the resonance position more or less unchanged.
954:
955: Similarly, that the width of the meson-meson resonance increases with $g$ is also a
956: consequence of the contraction of the mesons caused by the stronger quark-antiquark
957: attraction. This shrinking in size leads to a larger spreading of the meson-$q\bar q$ vertex
958: function in momentum space (see Fig.\ \ref{wavefunctions}), which in turn contributes to the
959: overlap integrals in the included Feynman diagrams in a wider momentum range, thereby
960: broadening the resonance.
961:
962: Finally, we should mention that our principal finding -- the existence of a narrow low-lying
963: resonance in our calculations -- does not depend on the particular value chosen as a
964: constraint for the $q \bar q$ bound-state mass. If we use, instead of 140 MeV, a much larger
965: or a much smaller value, we find again a narrow resonance close to threshold.
966:
967:
968: \section{Conclusions}
969: \label{S:conclusions}
970:
971: We calculated various models for quark-antiquark vertex functions within the 't
972: Hooft model by solving the corresponding $q \bar{q}$ Bethe-Salpeter equation. In all
973: cases, the bare quark masses and the quark-gluon coupling constants were tuned such
974: that the mass of the $q \bar{q}$ bound state coincides with the pion mass.
975:
976: We found that, within a limited range of coupling constants and
977: bare quark masses, one obtains $q \bar{q}$ bound states with the
978: features of a constituent quark model, i.\ e., where the meson mass is
979: approximately equal to the sum of the dressed quark masses.
980: On the other hand, for larger values of the quark-gluon coupling constant this
981: constituent quark picture is no longer sustained.
982:
983: We used the calculated Bethe-Salpeter wave functions to derive meson-meson
984: (``pion-pion'') scattering amplitudes within the 't Hooft model. They are
985: calculated from the leading-order quark-exchange diagrams. These QCD-based
986: meson-meson amplitudes exhibit a resonance structure close to threshold in all
987: considered cases. We extracted an effective mass and width of this ``sigma-like''
988: resonance by comparison with a simple s-channel resonance model where ``pions'' and
989: ``sigmas'' instead of quarks are the effective degrees of freedom.
990:
991: The extracted values are not meant to be completely realistic in the sense that
992: they should reproduce the experimental data, since the 't Hooft model is QCD only
993: under simplifying assumptions. However, the results of this calculation demonstrate
994: that the 't Hooft model can accomodate a resonance for the four-quark system,
995: already in the leading-order quark-exchange processes. In those exchange mechanisms,
996: the diquark correlation, given by the quark-antiquark vertex function, plays an
997: important role in determining the energy dependence of the meson-meson scattering
998: amplitude.
999:
1000: The fact that in our 't Hooft model calculations a narrow resonance lies close to
1001: threshold, while the broader sigma resonance is supposed to be located at higher
1002: energy, is indicative to the limitations of the 't Hooft model. It also hints at the
1003: importance of higher-order quark exchange processes as well as of gluon exchange
1004: contributions (higher order terms in the $1/N_c$ expansion), which should be
1005: investigated in future work.
1006:
1007:
1008: \section{Acknowledgements}
1009:
1010: This work was supported by the Funda\c c\~ao para
1011: a Ci\^encia e Tecnologia, Portugal, and
1012: FEDER, under grant number SFRH/BPD/5661/2001 (Z.B.), CERN/FIS/43709/2001 and
1013: POCTI/FNU/40834/2001 (M.T.P and A.S.).
1014:
1015: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1016: \bibitem{Walecka}B. D. Serot, J. D. Walecka, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E{\bf 6}, 515
1017: (1997).
1018: \bibitem{gary}G. Colangelo, J. Gasser, H. Leutwyler,
1019: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B603}, 125 (2001);
1020: G. Pr${\acute{ \rm e}}$zeau, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 59}, 2301 (1999).
1021: \bibitem{Isgur}S. Godfrey, N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 32}, 189 (1985).
1022: \bibitem{Close} F. E. Close and N. A. Tornqvist, J. Phys. G {\bf 28}, R249 (2002).
1023: \bibitem{Jaffe} M. Alford and R. L. Jaffe, hep-lat/0306037.
1024: \bibitem{thooft} G. 't Hooft, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B72}, 461 (1974).
1025: \bibitem{Cotanch} S. R. Cotanch and P. Maris, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 66}, 116010 (2002).
1026: %\bibitem{scad}M. Gell-Mann, M. Levy, Nuovo Cimento {\bf 16}, 705 (1960).
1027: \bibitem{GROSS1} F. Gross and J. Milana, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 43}, 2401 (1991);
1028: F. Gross and J. Milana, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 45}, 969 (1992);
1029: F. Gross and J. Milana, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 50}, 3332 (1994).
1030: \bibitem{zf} Z.\ Batiz and F.\ Gross, Phys. \ Rev.\ C {\bf
1031: 58}, 2963 (1998).
1032: \bibitem{PDG} K. Hagiwara {it et al.}, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 66}, 010001 (2002).
1033:
1034: \end{thebibliography}
1035:
1036:
1037:
1038:
1039: \end{document}
1040:
1041:
1042:
1043:
1044: %
1045: \begin{eqnarray}
1046: \mu^2=&&\frac{2 \pi r_+r_-}{g^2} \, , \nonumber\\
1047: \alpha_1=&&\frac{\pi m_1^2}{g^2} \, , \nonumber\\
1048: \alpha_2=&&\frac{\pi m_2^2}{g^2} \, , \nonumber\\
1049: x=&&\frac{p_-}{r_-} \, , \nonumber\\
1050: y=&&\frac{k_-}{r_-} \, .
1051: \label{2eq6}
1052: \end{eqnarray}
1053: %
1054:
1055:
1056: