1: % nGDH paper in RevTeX
2: \documentclass[preprint,aps,onecolumn,floatfix,showpacs]{revtex4}
3: %\documentclass[prc,aps,onecolumn,showpacs]{revtex4}
4: \usepackage{graphicx}
5: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0.25in}
6: \setlength{\evensidemargin}{0.25in}
7: \setlength{\textwidth}{6.0in}
8: \setlength{\topmargin}{-0.25in}
9: \setlength{\textheight}{9.0in}
10:
11: \begin{document}
12:
13: \title{Helicity-dependent photoabsorption cross sections on the nucleon
14: }
15:
16: \author{
17: R.A.~Arndt, W.J.~Briscoe, I.I.~Strakovsky, and R.L.~Workman
18: }
19:
20: \address{Center for Nuclear Studies, Physics Department \\
21: The George Washington University, Washington, D.C. 20052-0001
22: }
23:
24: \draft
25: \date{\today}
26:
27: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
28: \begin{abstract}
29:
30: We examine the energy dependence of single-meson photoproduction as
31: it contributes to the Gerasimov-Drell-Hearn (GDH) sum rule. For photon
32: energies above approximately 1~GeV, through the full resonance region,
33: this contribution dominates the proton sum rule integral. Over the same
34: energy region, our single-pion contribution to the neutron sum
35: rule also qualitatively follows a recent set of GDH data.
36: The predicted neutral-pion contribution is nearly zero above 1~GeV in
37: this result. The SAID and Mainz (MAID) results are very different for
38: a number of observables over this energy region.
39:
40: \end{abstract}
41:
42: \pacs{13.60.Hb, 25.20.Lj}
43:
44: \maketitle
45:
46: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
47: \section{Introduction}
48:
49: The Gerasimov-Drell-Hearn (GDH) sum rule~\cite{gdh} states that
50: \begin{eqnarray}
51: {{2\pi^2 \alpha}\over {M^2}}\left( \kappa_{p,n} \right)^2
52: = \int^{\infty}_{\nu_0} {{\sigma_{3/2}(\nu ) - \sigma_{1/2}(\nu )}\over
53: {\nu}} d\nu ,
54: \label{1}\end{eqnarray}
55: where $\kappa_p ( \kappa_n )$ is the proton(neutron) anomalous magnetic moment,
56: $\nu$ is the laboratory photon energy, $M$ is the nucleon mass, and $\alpha$ is
57: the fine structure constant. The left-hand-side represents the single-nucleon
58: contribution to the spin-flip amplitude, while the right-hand-side involves an
59: integration over the difference of helicity 3/2 and 1/2 $\gamma$-nucleon total
60: cross sections. This relation can be derived on the basis of fundamental
61: principles (such as gauge and Lorentz invariance) and is expected to be
62: satisfied exactly. While early results~\cite{old} suggested a possible
63: violation, careful measurements and estimates of the important high-energy
64: contribution have greatly reduced this discrepancy~\cite{Dutz2}. It now seems
65: unlikely that the sum rule, and the fundamental assumptions used in its
66: derivation, are violated.
67:
68: Early estimates of the GDH integral used phenomenological single-pion
69: photoproduction amplitudes and crude estimates for two-pion and other-meson
70: production. Particularly important are the two-pion production contributions,
71: as they dominate the total photoabsorption cross section over much of the
72: resonance region. To illustrate this point, the SAID~\cite{SAID} and
73: MAID~\cite{MAID} single-pion contributions to the total photoabsorption cross
74: section have been plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:g1}. Some of these two-pion
75: channels have been measured separately, and would appear to give a significant
76: contribution to the GDH sum rule over much of the resonance region~\cite{2pi}.
77: However, a quite different conclusion results if the measured helicity-dependent
78: total cross section ($\sigma_{3/2} - \sigma_{1/2}$) is compared to its
79: single-pion contribution over the resonance region. Single-pion predictions for
80: the SAID and MAID analyses are again plotted for comparison in Fig.~\ref{fig:g2}.
81: The contribution from eta-meson photoproduction is significant near its
82: threshold, due to the dominant N(1535), but is expected to contribute
83: little at higher energies. Its contribution, obtained from a SAID fit to
84: eta-photoproduction data, is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:g3}. The contributions from
85: kaon photoproduction are also small, based on fits to the existing data.
86:
87: In the proton sum rule, both the SAID and MAID single-pion predictions account
88: for almost the entire result for photon energies above 1~GeV. The SAID results
89: extend over a larger energy region, but qualitatively agree with MAID where
90: comparisons are possible. The SAID single-pion contribution to the neutron
91: sum rule also tends to follow the GDH measurement. Here, however, the MAID fit
92: diverges from the data, which (assuming a correct single-pion part) would
93: imply a large and increasing two-pion contribution to the neutron. The dip
94: near 900~MeV is seen in both the SAID and MAID single-pion contributions to
95: the neutron sum rule and does not appear to be the result of a problem in the
96: multipole analysis. However,
97: other quantities predicted by the SAID and MAID fits are
98: often quite different, particularly above 1~GeV in the photon energy. In
99: Figs.~\ref{fig:g4}(a) and \ref{fig:g4}(b), we compare the SAID and MAID fits
100: to $p\pi^0$ differential cross section and $p\pi^-$ $\Sigma$ data.
101:
102: Conclusions regarding single-pion contributions to the neutron sum rule
103: are much less solid, as the underlying single-pion photoproduction database
104: is less complete and precise than the available proton-target data. In
105: particular, there is almost no $\gamma n\to n\pi^0$ data of any kind. This
106: component of the neutron sum rule is therefore purely a prediction, based
107: upon amplitudes extracted from the $p\pi^0$, $n\pi^+$, and $p\pi^-$ channels.
108: Interestingly, these amplitudes conspire to cancel in the SAID solution,
109: giving a negligible $n\pi^0$ contribution to the neutron sum rule above about
110: 1~GeV. The $n\pi^0$ and $p\pi^-$ contributions from SAID and MAID are compared
111: in Fig.~\ref{fig:g5}. We therefore find that the $p\pi^-$ component mainly
112: responsible for the qualitative agreement shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:g2}(a). Both
113: the SAID solution and data suggest an upward trend near 2~GeV. Examining the
114: behavior of our fits at the high energy limit, we cannot claim this to be
115: more than an artifact. Comparing our fits SM02 and SM05, the fit influenced
116: by more recent high-energy ELSA and JLab data (SM05) displays a less
117: pronounced upward trend. If the highest energy measurement is more than a
118: fluctuation, it would signal a resonance contribution not contained in either
119: the SAID pion-nucleon~\cite{pin} or pion-photoproduction~\cite{SAID} analyses.
120: Given that a similar trend is not seen in the proton GDH data, this
121: resonance contribution would decay to $\gamma n$ much more readily than
122: $\gamma p$.
123:
124: In summary, data that have been measured to verify the GDH sum rule may
125: be equally valuable in understanding both resonance physics and the
126: transition between resonance and Regge dominated regions. The apparent
127: cancellation of large multi-pion contributions to the proton GDH sum rule
128: suggests an underlying principle which deserves further investigation.
129: Certainly it would be interesting to extend the single-pion analysis in
130: order to see how high in energy the trend of Fig.~\ref{fig:g2} continues.
131: Work on this project is in progress. The comparison of proton and neutron
132: GDH data, versus the single-pion photoproduction contribution, suggests the
133: existence of states coupling more strongly to $\gamma n$ than $\gamma p$.
134: These features should motivate further measurements of two-pion production,
135: and single-meson photoproduction off the neutron.
136:
137: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
138: \begin{acknowledgments}
139: %
140: We thank P.~Pedroni for a discussion of the GDH measurements.
141: This work was supported in part by a U.S.~Department of Energy grant
142: DE--FG02--99ER41110, and by Jefferson Lab.
143: %
144: \end{acknowledgments}
145:
146: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
147: \begin{figure*}[th]
148: \centering{
149: \includegraphics[height=0.7\textwidth, angle=90]{f1.eps}
150: }\caption{Single-pion photoproduction contributions to the
151: total cross section for a proton target. SAID
152: SM05~\protect\cite{SAID05} (solid) and MAID2003
153: ~\protect\cite{MAID} (dashed) analyses. The proton
154: photoabsorption data from Ref.~\protect\cite{pdgd}.}
155: \label{fig:g1}
156: \end{figure*}
157: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
158: \begin{figure*}[th]
159: \centering{
160: \includegraphics[height=0.5\textwidth, angle=90]{f2a.eps}\hfill
161: \includegraphics[height=0.5\textwidth, angle=90]{f2b.eps}
162: }\caption{Single-pion photoproduction contributions to the
163: (a) neutron and (b) proton GDH sum rules from the
164: SAID SM05~\protect\cite{SAID05} (solid),
165: recently published SM02~\protect\cite{SAID} (dotted),
166: and MAID2003~\protect\cite{MAID} (dashed) analyses.
167: GDH data from Refs.~\protect\cite{Dutz,Dutz2}.}
168: \label{fig:g2}
169: \end{figure*}
170: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
171: \begin{figure*}[th]
172: \centering{
173: \includegraphics[height=0.5\textwidth, angle=90]{f3.eps}\hfill
174: }\caption{SAID single-eta photoproduction contribution to the proton
175: sum rule.}
176: \label{fig:g3}
177: \end{figure*}
178: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
179: \begin{figure*}[th]
180: \centering{
181: \includegraphics[height=0.53\textwidth, angle=90]{f4a.eps}\hfill
182: \includegraphics[height=0.47\textwidth, angle=90]{f4b.eps}
183: }\caption{Single-pion photoproduction above 1~GeV.
184: (a) $p\pi^0$ differential cross section at
185: 1475~MeV and (b) $p\pi^-$ $\Sigma$ beam
186: asymetry at 90$^\circ$. Cross section data
187: from ~\protect\cite{ELSA} and $\Sigma$ data
188: from~\protect\cite{s90}. Predictions from
189: SAID SM05~\protect\cite{SAID05} (solid)
190: and MAID2003~\protect\cite{MAID} (dashed)
191: analyses.} \label{fig:g4}
192: \end{figure*}
193: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
194: \begin{figure*}[th]
195: \centering{
196: \includegraphics[height=0.5\textwidth, angle=90]{f5a.eps}\hfill
197: \includegraphics[height=0.5\textwidth, angle=90]{f5b.eps}
198: }\caption{Single-pion photoproduction for (a) $\gamma n\to\pi^-p$
199: and (b) $\gamma n\to\pi^0n$. Predictions are given
200: for the SAID SM05~\protect\cite{SAID05} (solid)
201: and MAID2003~\protect\cite{MAID} (dashed) analyses.}
202: \label{fig:g5}
203: \end{figure*}
204:
205: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
206: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
207:
208: \bibitem{gdh} S.~B.~Gerasimov, Yad.\ Fiz.\ \textbf{2}, 598 (1965) [Sov.\
209: J.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ \textbf{2}, 430 (1966)]; S.~D.~Drell and
210: A.~C.~Hearn, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{16}, 908 (1966).
211:
212: \bibitem{old} I.~Karliner, Phys.\ Rev.\ D\ \textbf{7}, 2717 (1973);
213: R.~L.~Workman and R.~A.~Arndt, Phys.\ Rev.\ D\ \textbf{45},
214: 1789 (1992).
215:
216: \bibitem{Dutz2}H.~Dutz \textit{et al.} (GDH Collaboration), Phys.\ Rev.\
217: Lett.\ \textbf{93}, 032003 (2004).
218:
219: \bibitem{SAID} R.~A.~Arndt, W.~J.~Briscoe, I.~I.~Strakovsky, and
220: R.~L.~Workman, Phys.\ Rev.\ C\ \textbf{66}, 055213 (2002)
221: [nucl-th/0205067].
222:
223: \bibitem{MAID} D.~Drechsel, O.~Hanstein, S.~S.~Kamalov, and
224: L.~Tiator, Nucl.\ Phys.\ \textbf{A645}, 145 (1999)
225: [nucl-th/9807001];\\
226: MAID (2003), \hbox{http://www.kph.uni-mainz.de/MAID}.
227:
228: \bibitem{SAID05}The SAID SM05 solution used recent ELSA $\pi^0p$
229: unpolarized measurements~\protect\cite{ELSA}.
230:
231: \bibitem{ELSA} O.~Bartholomy \textit{et al.} (CB-ELSA
232: Collaboration), Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{94},
233: 012003 (2005) [hep-ex/0407022].
234:
235: \bibitem{pdgd} The proton photoabsorption data are taken from \\
236: \hbox{http://pdg.lbl.gov/2005/hadronic-xsections/hadron.html}.
237:
238: \bibitem{2pi} J.~Ahrens \textit{et al.} (GDH and A2 Collaborations),
239: Phys.\ Lett.\ B\ \textbf{551}, 49 (2003).
240:
241: \bibitem{Dutz} H.~Dutz \textit{et al.} (GDH Collaboration), Phys.\ Rev.\
242: Lett.\ \textbf{94}, 162001 (2005).
243:
244: \bibitem{s90} V.~B.~Ganenko \textit{et al.}, Yad.\ Fiz.\
245: \textbf{23}, xxx (1976) [Sov.\ J.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\
246: \textbf{23}, 511 (1976)];\\
247: K.~Kondo \textit{et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ D\
248: \textbf{9}, 529 (1974);\\
249: K.~Kondo \textit{et al.}, J.\ Phys.\ Soc.\
250: Japan \textbf{29}, 13 (1970);\\
251: G.~Knies \textit{et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\ D\
252: \textbf{10}, 2778 (1974);\\
253: J.~Alspector \textit{et al.}, Phys.\ Rev.\
254: Lett.\ \textbf{28}, 1403 (1972);\\
255: F.~V.~Adamyan \textit{et al.}, J.\ of Phys.\ G
256: \textbf{15}, 1797 (1989).
257:
258: \bibitem{pin} R.~A.~Arndt, W.~J.~Briscoe, I.~I.~Strakovsky,
259: R.~L.~Workman, and M.~M.~Pavan, Phys.\ Rev.\ C\ \textbf{69},
260: 035213 (2004) [nucl-th/0311089].
261:
262: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
263: \end{thebibliography}
264: \end{document}
265: