1:
2:
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9: %\documentclass[aps,showpacs,preprintnumbers]{revtex4}
10: \documentclass[aps,showpacs,preprintnumbers,floats,11pt]{revtex4}
11: %\newcommand{\wuhao} {\fontsize{10.5pt}{\baselineskip}\selectfont}
12: \renewcommand\baselinestretch{1.5}
13:
14: \voffset 2.0cm \hoffset -0.4cm
15:
16: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
17: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
18: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
19: \usepackage{epsfig}
20: \usepackage{amsmath}
21:
22: \begin{document}
23:
24: \title{On the momentum-dependence of $K^{-}$-nuclear potentials }
25: \author{
26: L.\ Dang$^1$\footnote{E-mail: xiaoerqun@yahoo.com.cn },
27: L.\ Li$^1$\footnote{E-mail: lilei@nankai.edu.cn}
28: X.\ H.\ Zhong$^2$\footnote{E-mail: zhongxh@ihep.ac.cn}, and
29: P. Z. Ning$^1$\footnote{E-mail: ningpz@nankai.edu.cn}
30: }
31: \affiliation{
32: $^1$Department of Physics, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China\\
33: $^2$Institute of High Energy Physics,
34: Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100039, China}
35: %\date{\today}
36:
37: \begin{abstract}
38: The momentum dependent $K^{-}$-nucleus optical potentials are obtained based on
39: the relativistic mean-field theory. By considering the quarks
40: coordinates of $K^-$ meson, we introduced a momentum-dependent
41: ``form factor" to modify the coupling vertexes. The parameters in
42: the form factors are determined by fitting the experimental
43: $K^{-}$-nucleus scattering data. It is found that the real part of
44: the optical potentials decrease with increasing $K^-$ momenta,
45: however the imaginary potentials increase at first with increasing
46: momenta up to $P_k=450\sim 550$ MeV and then decrease. By comparing
47: the calculated $K^-$ mean free paths with those from $K^-n$/$K^-p$
48: scattering data, we suggested that the real potential depth is
49: $V_0\sim 80$ MeV, and the imaginary potential parameter is $W_0\sim
50: 65$ MeV.
51: \end{abstract}
52:
53: \keywords {momentum dependence optical potential,kaon-nucleus}
54:
55: \pacs{21.65.+f, 21.30.Fe}
56:
57: \maketitle
58:
59:
60: Recently kaon nuclear physics has been a hot topic of nuclear
61: physics, and kaon-nucleus interaction is a key point to many studies
62: on kaon. The information of $K^-$-nucleus interaction were obtained
63: from $K^{-}$- atomic and $K^-N$ scattering data. Since kaon is only
64: sensitive to the surface structure of nuclei in $K^{-}$- atomic,
65: predictions on $K^-$-nucleus interactions are very different for
66: different models (a very strong attractive real potential, $150\sim
67: 200$ MeV, from the density dependent optical potential (DD) model
68: \cite{Frid,Frid1999}; and a much shallower one $\sim50$ MeV from the
69: chiral model \cite{Hirenzaki}).
70: On the other hand, Sibirtsev \emph{et al.}
71: predicted the kaon-nucleus interaction has ``momentum dependence"
72: from $K^-N$ scattering data \cite{sib}. They have obtained a
73: momentum dependent potential in a dispersion approach at normal
74: nuclear density, the potential depth is about $140\pm 20 $MeV at
75: zero momentum, and decreases rapidly for higher momenta. In our
76: previous work \cite{zh}, we also found that the kaon nucleus optical
77: potential has strong momentum dependence by fitting the only
78: experimental data on the $K^-$-$C$, $K^-$-$Ca$ scattering at
79: $P_k=800$ MeV/c \cite{dmar}. We indicated that the depth of real
80: potential at the inner nuclei is $(45\pm 5)$ MeV at $P_k=800$ MeV/c,
81: which is much shallower than that at zero momentum in the RMF. We
82: shall here be concerned with discussing the momentum dependence of
83: $K^-$-nucleus interaction within the framework of RMF.
84:
85:
86: In the usual RMF model, one cannot
87: obtain the correct momentum dependence of $K^-$-nucleus interaction,
88: and have to take the internal structure of kaon into account to
89: introduce a momentum-dependent ``form factor" \cite{dow}. When RMF
90: is extended to study KN interaction at the quark level, the same
91: approximation
92: as made in the quark-meson
93: coupling (QMC) model\cite{kts, kts1} should be introduced: $\sigma$-
94: and $\omega$-mesons are exchanged only between the $u, d$ quarks or
95: their anti-quarks in $K$ meson, contributions from the $s$ quark are
96: ignored. In the following, we shall take kaon as a two quarks system
97: to introduce an exponential ``form factor",
98: $\exp(-P^2_k/4\kappa^2)$, which modify the couplings vertexes. In
99: fact, similar exponential ``form factor" has been widely adopted to
100: improve various calculations \cite{zhao,exf,exf1}.
101:
102: \begin{figure}[ht]
103: \center
104: \epsfig{file=aa.eps,width=6.0cm} \caption{Feynman diagram for the KN interactions
105: and internal coordinate of two quark system}
106: \label{opt}
107: \end{figure}
108:
109: In the RMF, the $KN$ interactions are described by exchanging
110: scalar meson $\sigma$ and vector meson $\omega$ \cite{zhong}. At the
111: quark level, $\sigma$- and $\omega$-mesons are exchanged between the
112: $u, d$ quarks or their anti-quarks. See Fig. \ref{opt}, the scalar
113: and vector couplings are
114:
115: \begin{eqnarray}
116: \mathcal{L}_\sigma&=&g_{\sigma K}m_K \bar{K} \sigma K,\\
117: \mathcal{L}_\omega&=&ig_{\omega K} \bar{K} \omega^{\mu}
118: \partial_{\mu} K+ H.C..
119: \end{eqnarray}
120: Replacing the scalar meson $\sigma$ and vector meson $\omega$ with
121: their plane wave form to get,
122: \begin{eqnarray}
123: \mathcal{L}_\sigma&=&g_{\sigma K}m_K\bar{K} \left(a_\sigma e^{-i\textbf{q}\cdot \textbf{r}_2}\right) K,\\
124: \mathcal{L}_\omega&=&ig_{\omega K}\bar{K} \left(a_\omega
125: e^{-i\textbf{q}\cdot \textbf{r}_2}\varepsilon^\mu\right)
126: \partial_{\mu} K+ H.C.,
127: \end{eqnarray}
128: where $\textbf{r}_2$ represents the coordinates of $u/ d$ quarks,
129: with respect to the center of mass coordinates $\textbf{R}$ and the
130: relative coordinates $\textbf{r}$ in the quark model. And we assume
131: $\textbf{q}=c\textbf{P}_k$ approximately as the transferred momentum
132: being proportional to $K^-$ incidence momentum. Thus one get
133: \begin{eqnarray}
134: e^{-i\textbf{q}\cdot \textbf{r}_2}=e^{-ic\textbf{P}_K \cdot
135: \textbf{R}}e^{\frac{\mu}{m_2}ic\textbf{P}_K \cdot\textbf{r}}.
136: \end{eqnarray}
137: On the harmonic-oscillator basis, if the relative coordinates
138: $\textbf{r}$ is rewritten in the second-quantized form, then
139: \begin{eqnarray}
140: e^{-i\textbf{q}\cdot \textbf{r}_2}=e^{-ic\textbf{P}_K \cdot
141: \textbf{R}}e^{\frac{c^2\textbf{P}^2_K}{4\alpha^2(m_u/\mu)^2}}e^{\frac{\mu}{m_2}ic\textbf{P}_K
142: \cdot\textbf{a}^{\dagger}}e^{\frac{\mu}{m_2}ic\textbf{P}_K
143: \cdot\textbf{a}}.
144: \end{eqnarray}
145:
146: Finally, approximately we have
147: \begin{eqnarray}
148: \mathcal{L}_\sigma&\simeq &g_{\sigma K} m_K F(P^2_k)\bar{K} K
149: a_\sigma e^{-ic\textbf{P}_K \cdot \textbf{R}},\label{17}\\
150: \mathcal{L}_\omega&\simeq &ig_{\omega K}F(P^2_k)\bar{K}
151: \varepsilon^{\mu} a_\omega e^{-ic\textbf{P}_K\cdot \textbf{R}}
152: \partial_{\mu} K+ H.C.,\label{8}
153: \end{eqnarray}
154: with
155: \begin{eqnarray}
156: F(P^2_k)\equiv\exp[-P^2_k/(4\kappa^2)],
157: \end{eqnarray}
158: where $\kappa^2 \equiv \alpha^2(m_u/c\mu)^2, $ and
159: $P_k=|\textbf{P}_K|$.
160:
161:
162: In the c.m. system of $K$-meson, replace $
163: a_\sigma e^{-ic\textbf{P}_K\cdot \textbf{R}}$ (
164: $a_\omega\varepsilon^{\mu}e^{-ic\textbf{P}_K\cdot \textbf{R}}$) with
165: $\sigma$ ($\omega^\mu$), Eqs.(\ref{17}, \ref{8}) can be rewritten
166: as,
167: \begin{eqnarray}
168: \mathcal{L}_\sigma&\simeq &g_{\sigma K}F(P^2_k)m_K \bar{K} K
169: \sigma\label{aa},\\
170: \mathcal{L}_\omega&\simeq &ig_{\omega K}F(P^2_k)
171: \left[\bar{K}\partial_{\mu}K-K\partial_{\mu}\bar{K}\right]\omega^{\mu}.\label{bb}
172: \end{eqnarray}
173:
174: Comparing with the formulation without considering the quarks
175: coordinates of $K$-meson, it is obvious that an additional factor
176: $F(P^2_k)$ appears in the vertexes. Thus, the usual
177: RMF Lagrangian for $KN$ interaction should be modified as
178: \begin{eqnarray}
179: {\mathcal{L}}_{\mathrm{K}}=&&
180: \partial_{\mu}\bar{K}\partial^{\mu}K
181: -m_K^2\bar{K}K-g_{\sigma K}m_{K}F(P^2_k)\bar{K}K\sigma
182: \nonumber\\
183: &&-ig_{\omega K}F(P^2_k)\left[\bar{K}\partial_{\mu}K-K\partial_{\mu}\bar{K}\right]\omega^{\mu}\nonumber\\
184: && +\left[g_{\omega K}F(P^2_k)\omega^{\mu}\right]^2\bar{K}K.
185: \end{eqnarray}
186: After a few simply deductions \cite{zhong}, we can obtain the real
187: part of the $K$-nucleus optical potential,
188: \begin{eqnarray}
189: \mathrm{Re}U
190: =&&\big[g_{\sigma\mathrm{K}}m_{\mathrm{K}}\sigma_{0}-2g_{\omega\mathrm{K}}E_{\mathrm{K}}\omega_0
191: -F(P^2_k)(g_{\omega\mathrm{K}}\omega_0)^2\big]\nonumber\\ && \cdot
192: F(P^2_k)/2m_K, \label{realp}
193: \end{eqnarray}
194: which refer to the $K$-meson three momenta by the form factor
195: $F(P^2_k)$. The $K^-$-meson energy $E_{\mathrm{K}}$ can also be
196: deduced from the RMF model \cite{zhong},
197: \begin{eqnarray}
198: E_\mathrm{K}=\sqrt{m_{\mathrm{K}}^2+g_{\sigma\mathrm{K}}F(P^2_k)m_{\mathrm{K}}\sigma_{0}+P_{k}^2}
199: -g_{\omega\mathrm{K}}F(P^2_k)\omega_0. \label{ek}
200: \end{eqnarray}
201: Here the coupling constants $g_{\sigma K}=$2.088 and $g_{\omega
202: K}=$3.02, which are used mostly in the RMF\cite{zhong}.
203:
204: Up to now the anti-kaon absorption in the nuclear medium are
205: ignored, since imaginary potential cannot be obtained directly from
206: RMF. Similar to our previous work \cite{zhong}, we assumed a
207: specific form of the imaginary potentials:
208: \begin{eqnarray}
209: \mathrm{Im}
210: U=-f\cdot[F_2(P^2_k)]^2\cdot\left[\frac{E_{\mathrm{K}}}{m_k}W_{0}
211: \frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right], \label{imgp}
212: \end{eqnarray}
213: where $ F_2(P^2_k)=e^{-P^2_k/(4\beta^2)}$, which is also introduced
214: to modify the imaginary potential (i.e. decay widths) as did in the
215: real part. For the decay width $\Gamma\propto \mathcal{M}^2\propto
216: g^2$, where $\mathcal{M}$ is the decay amplitude, and $g$ is the
217: coupling, the square of the ``form factor" $[F_2(P^2_k)]^2$ is
218: adopted. Besides, the phase space available for the decay products
219: should be considered \cite{d,Galaa}, which effects the imaginary
220: potentials (widths). Thus, a factor, $f$, multiplying imaginary
221: potentials Im$U$ is introduced in our calculations, as did in Ref.
222: \cite{zhong} (replace Re$E$ with $E_\mathrm{K}$ of Eq. (\ref{ek})).
223: The factor $f$ can be assumed a mixture of 80\% mesonic decay and
224: 20\% non-mesonic decay \cite{d,Galaa}, thus $f = 0.8f_1 + 0.2f_2$.
225: The imaginary potential parameter $W_0$, which is the depth of the
226: imaginary potential at zero momentum, is not determined well. By
227: fitting the $K^-$- atomic data, $W_0\sim 50$ MeV
228: \cite{Frid,Frid1999}, however, the predictions in Refs.
229: \cite{Shev,MOT} give a much deep value $W_0\sim 100$ MeV. In this
230: work, we shall discuss several cases for $W_0=50,65,80$ MeV.
231:
232: \begin{figure}[ht]
233: \center
234: \epsfig{file=cross1.eps,width=9.2cm} \caption{On the several cases of different real (c, d) and imaginary (a, b) potentials,
235: the elastic differential cross section for $K^{-}$
236: scattering from $^{40}Ca$ and $^{12}C$ as functions of c. m. angles
237: at $p_{k}$=800 MeV/c are shown in Figs.(a, c) and (b,d),
238: respectively. The experimental data are from Ref. \cite{dmar}.}
239: \label{cross}
240: \end{figure}
241:
242:
243: \begin{figure}[ht]
244: \center
245: \epsfig{file=Uopt.eps,width=6.0cm} \caption{The real and imaginary anti-kaon optical potentials
246: in normal nuclear matter based on our model ( solid dotted lines)
247: and the other models are shown in Fig.(a) and (b), respectively.
248: The solid pentagons curves are the predictions of a meson-exchange
249: model with the J$\ddot{u}$lich $KN$ interaction \cite{a.ramos}. The
250: hollow pentagons curves are the results based on the lowest-order
251: meson-baryon chiral lagrangian (the anti-kaons and pions are dressed
252: self-consistently) \cite{laura}. The shadow region between two solid
253: curves is the results predicted by Sibirtsev and Cassing (SC model)
254: \cite{sib}, and the crossed rectangle indicate the results from the
255: analysis of $K^-$ production in $Ni+Ni$ collisions \cite{c5,wc}. }
256: \label{opt1}
257: \end{figure}
258:
259:
260:
261: Finally, a momentum-dependent $K^{-}$-nuclear potential is obtained.
262: Naturally, we do not expect the naive quark model to give
263: appropriate values for the parameter $\kappa$ and $\beta$. In the
264: calculation, the parameters $\kappa$ and $\beta$ are determined by
265: fitting the $K$-nucleus scattering data. The experimental data of
266: the differential elastic cross sections for $K^{-}$-$^{12}C$ and
267: $K^{-}$-$^{40}Ca$ at $P_{\mathrm{K}}$= 800 MeV/c \cite{dmar} are
268: used to determine the parameters $\kappa=0.275$ GeV and $\beta=
269: (0.49, 0.44, 0.42)$ GeV (corresponding to $W_0=50,65,80$ MeV,
270: respectively). In Fig. \ref{cross}(a, b), according to the optical
271: potentials from equations (\ref{realp}) and (\ref{imgp}), the
272: experimental data are fitted very well. With the determined
273: parameters, we plotted the potentials as functions of kaon three
274: momentum $P_k$ at normal nuclear density in Fig. \ref{opt1}. The
275: real and imaginary parts are shown in Fig. \ref{opt1}(a) and (b),
276: respectively. The solid dotted lines are our calculations of Eqs.
277: (\ref{realp}, \ref{imgp}), the potentials predicted by the others
278: \cite{a.ramos,laura, sib} are also presented in the same figure.
279:
280:
281: From Fig. \ref{opt1}(a), we can see that our results on real
282: potentials decrease with increasing momenta, their varying
283: tendencies are in agreement with the other models
284: \cite{a.ramos,laura, sib}. The depths predicted by us are deeper
285: than those of chiral and J$\ddot{u}$lich models. Among these models,
286: chiral model gives much shallower real potential depths than the
287: other three models. The results of J$\ddot{u}$lich $KN$ interaction
288: and RMF model (with form factors) are compatible at $P_K< 600$ MeV,
289: which are almost in the possible region predicted by SC model. On
290: the other hand, the real potential based on the RMF without ``form
291: factor"
292: is also shown in Fig. \ref{opt1}(a). It is obvious that $F_1(P^2_K)$
293: has a great influence on the real potential, its corrections to the
294: varying
295: tendency of the real potentials are important. From Fig. \ref{opt1}(b), our results of the imaginary
296: potentials increase at first with increasing momenta up to
297: $P_k=450\sim 550$ MeV and then decrease, their varying tendencies
298: are in a similar way to the results of Ref. \cite{a.ramos}. There is
299: a flat for imaginary potential curve in the low energy $P_k< 100$
300: MeV region, which is referred to the factor $f_1=0$, indicates that
301: the total energy $(M_N+E_K)$ is less than the threshold of $\Sigma
302: \pi$, and the decay channel $NK\rightarrow \Sigma \pi$ is closed.
303:
304: \begin{figure}[ht]
305: \center
306: \epsfig{file=mfp.eps,width=6.0cm} \caption{According to the different imaginary (real)
307: potentials, the $K^-$ mean free paths as functions of the incident
308: momenta in normal nuclear matter are shown in Fig.(a)(Fig.(b)). The
309: mean free path from the experimental $Kp$ and ($Kp+Kn$)/2 total
310: cross sections are also presented. Corresponding to the
311: $\lambda_\mathbf{K}$ in Fig.(b), the real and imaginary parts of
312: $K^-$
313: optical potentials are also shown in Fig.(c).} \label{mfp0}
314: \end{figure}
315:
316:
317: However, $K^-$-nucleus elastic scattering data are not good enough
318: to test the validity of the physics contained in our model. Since
319: little experimental information came directly from the inner nuclei
320: for kaon, there are much uncertainties in both the real potentials
321: and the imaginary parts. The $K^{-}$ mean free paths (MFP) in
322: nuclear matter can be calculated with the determined
323: momentum-dependent potentials, which can also be estimated from the
324: experimental data of the total cross sections for $K^-p$ and $K^-n$
325: \cite{PDG}. By comparing the results in two different approaches, we
326: expect to find more constraints on the $KN$ interactions.
327:
328: The details of how to calculate a particle's MFP are given in our
329: previous work \cite{wang}, only the formula of
330: $\lambda_{\mathrm{K}}$ is given here,
331: \begin{eqnarray}
332: \lambda_{\mathrm{K}}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{m_\mathrm{K}\cdot[B^{2}+(\mathrm{Im}
333: U)^{2}]^{\frac{1}{2}}
334: -m_\mathrm{K}\cdot B}}, \label{lambda1}
335: \end{eqnarray}
336: where, $B\equiv E_\mathrm{K}-m_\mathrm{K}-\mathrm{Re}
337: U+(E_\mathrm{K}- m_\mathrm{K})^{2}/2m_\mathrm{K}$. On the other
338: hand, the MFP of $K^-$ is related to the $K^-p$/$K^-n$ scattering
339: data by a simple relation $\lambda=1/\rho\overline{\sigma}$, where
340: $\bar{\sigma}=(\sigma_{Kn}+\sigma_{Kp})/2$ is the average of total
341: $K^-n$ and $K^-p$ cross sections. There are some $K^-p$ scattering
342: data in the range of $240<P_k<1000$ MeV, and a few data for $K^-n$
343: scattering in $600<P_k<1000$ MeV. Thus only the MFP data from
344: $\bar{\sigma}=(\sigma_{Kn}+\sigma_{Kp})/2$ in the latter region can
345: be compared. The results of two approaches are shown in Fig.
346: \ref{mfp0}.
347:
348: From the figure, we find that
349: $\lambda_p$ ($=1/\rho\sigma_{Kp}$) is a little larger
350: than $\lambda$ ($=1/\rho\overline{\sigma}$), and we assume
351: $\lambda_p\simeq \lambda$ in the region of $P_k<600$
352: MeV. There is a ``peak" in each of our calculated curves of the MFP,
353: which is referred to the factor $f_1=0$, corresponds to the position
354: of $M_N+E_K=M_\Sigma +M_\pi$. By comparing the results of different
355: imaginary potential parameter $W_0$ with the $\lambda_p$, and
356: considering $\lambda
357: > \lambda_p$ and $\lambda \simeq \lambda_p$, we think the most possible imaginary depth
358: parameter $W_0$ should be $\sim 65$ MeV.
359:
360: If one takes the coupling constant $g_{\sigma K}$ to be a free
361: parameter, the different real potential depths can be obtained by
362: adjusting $g_{\sigma K}$. With $W_0=65$ MeV (the corresponding form
363: factor parameter $\beta$ = 0.44 GeV), the mean free paths are
364: calculated for the different real potential depths $V_0=83,\ 99,\
365: 146$ MeV (the corresponding coupling constant $g_{\sigma K}$=1.044,
366: 2.088, 5.44), which are shown in Fig. \ref{mfp0}(b). The
367: corresponding real and imaginary parts of the optical potentials are
368: also shown in Fig. \ref{mfp0}(c). The form factor parameters of the
369: real potential ( $\kappa$ = 0.285, 0.255 GeV correspond to
370: $g_{\sigma K}$=1.044, 5.44, respectively) are determined by fitting
371: the $K^-$ nucleus scattering data (which are shown in Fig.
372: \ref{cross}(c, d)). From Fig. \ref{mfp0}(b), we can see that our
373: calculations of $V_0=83$ MeV are most compatible with the
374: $\lambda_p$ from $K^-p$ scattering data. And in Fig. \ref{mfp0}(c),
375: with $V_0= 83$ MeV and $W_0 = 65$ MeV, both the real and imaginary
376: potentials (the solid curves) of our calculations are very close to
377: those of J$\ddot{u}$lich $KN$ interactions \cite{a.ramos} (the star
378: curves) in the range of $P_k<100$ MeV. It is interesting that the
379: recent experiment also indicated that the in-medium $K^-N$ potential
380: depth is about $\sim80$ MeV at normal nuclear density \cite{expk}.
381:
382: As a whole, with the constraints of the MFP from KN
383: scattering data, we predicted that the real potential depth is
384: $V_0\sim 80$ MeV, and the imaginary parameter $W_0\sim 65$ MeV. One
385: point must be emphasized, if the above results about the potential
386: depths are right, according to our calculations on $K^-$-nuclei in
387: \cite{zhong}, the sum of the half widths of the 1s and 1p states are
388: larger than their separations in $K^-$-nuclei. In other words, no
389: discrete $K^-$ bound states in the $A\geq 12$ nuclei can be found in
390: experiments.
391:
392:
393: In conclusion, the
394: momentum dependence of $K^-$ nucleus potentials have been studied in
395: the framework of RMF theory. We think that the interior structure of
396: a kaon may be one of the origin of the momentum dependence, and
397: introduce a ``form factor" to correct both the real and imaginary
398: parts of the potential. It is found that the real part of the
399: optical potentials decrease with increasing $K^-$ momenta, however
400: the imaginary potentials increase at first with increasing momenta
401: up to $P_k=450\sim 550$ MeV and then decrease. The effects of the
402: exponential form factor on real and imaginary potentials are
403: important. Analyzing several cases on both the real and imaginary
404: potential depths, we predicted that the real potential depth is
405: $V_0\sim 80$ MeV, and the imaginary parameter $W_0\sim 65$ MeV with
406: the constraints of the MFP from KN scattering data.
407:
408:
409:
410:
411: X.H. Zhong would like to thank Prof. H.Oeschler for useful
412: discussions. This work was supported, in part, by the Natural
413: Science Foundation of China (Grand No. 10575054), China Postdoctoral
414: Science Foundation, and the Institute of High Energy Physics, CAS.
415:
416: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
417:
418:
419:
420: \bibitem{Frid}
421: E. Friedman, A. Gal, C. J. Batty,
422: Phys. Lett. B \textbf{308}, 6 (1993);
423: Nucl. Phys. A\textbf{579}, 518 (1994).
424:
425: \bibitem{Frid1999}
426: E. Friedman, A. Gal, J. Mare\v{s}, A. Ciepl\'{y},
427: Phys. Rev. C \textbf{60}, 024314 (1999).
428: %DD model
429: \bibitem{Hirenzaki} S. Hirenzaki, Y. Okumura, H. Toki, E. Oset, and A.
430: Ramos, Phys. Rev. C \textbf{61}, 055205 (2000).
431: \bibitem{sib} A. Sibirtsev and W.Cassing, Nucl. Phys. A\textbf{641}, 476, (1998); nucl-th/9909024
432: \bibitem{zh}Xian-Hui Zhong, Lei Li, Chong-Hai Cai, Ping-Zhi
433: Ning, Commun. Theor. Phys. \textbf{41}, 573, (2004).
434: \bibitem{dmar} D. Marlow, \emph{et al}, Phys. Rev. C \textbf{25}, 2619(1982).
435: \bibitem{dow} C. Downum, \emph{et al.}, Phys. Lett. B \textbf{638}, 455 (2006).
436: \bibitem{kts} K. Tsushima, K. Saito, A.W. Thomas and S. V. Wright, Phys. Lett. B \textbf{411}, 9
437: (1997).
438: \bibitem{kts1} K. Tsushima, \emph{et al.}, Phys. Lett. B \textbf{429}, 239
439: (1998); Nucl. Phys. A\textbf{630}, 691 (1998).
440: \bibitem{zhao} Qiang Zhao, Phys. Lett. B \textbf{636} 197 (2006);
441: Q. Zhao, Phys. Rev. D \textbf{72}, 074001 (2005); hep-ph/0508086;
442: F.E. Close and Q. Zhao, Phys. Rev. D \textbf{71}. 094022 (2005).
443: \bibitem{exf} N. Isgur, D. Scora, B. Grinstein, and M. B. Wise, Phys. Rev. D \textbf{39},
444: 799 (1989); F. E. Close and A. Wambach, Nucl. Phys. B\textbf{412},
445: 169 (1994).
446: \bibitem{exf1} R. Kokoski and N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D \textbf{35}, 907
447: (1987).
448: \bibitem{zhong} X.H. Zhong, G. X. Peng, L. Li, P. Z. Ning, Phys. Rev. C \textbf{74}, 034321, (2006).
449: \bibitem{d}J. Mare\v{s}, E. Friedman, and A. Gal, Phys. Lett. B \textbf{606}, 295 (2005).
450: \bibitem{Galaa} J. Mare\v{s}, E. Friedman, and A. Gal, Nucl. Phys. A\textbf{770}, 84 (2006).
451: \bibitem{Shev} N.V. Shevchenko, A. Gal, J. Mares, nucl-th/0610022
452: \bibitem{MOT} V.K. Magas, \emph{et al.}, nucl-th/0611098.
453: \bibitem{a.ramos} L. Tolos, \emph{et al.}, Nucl. Phys. A\textbf{690}, 547 (2001).
454:
455: \bibitem{laura} A. Ramos and E. Oset, Nucl. Phys. A\textbf{671} 481 (2001).
456:
457: \bibitem{wc}W. Cassing and E. L. Bratkovskaya, Phys. Rep. \textbf{308}, 65 (1999).
458: \bibitem{c5}
459: G. Q. Li, C. -H. Lee, and G. E. Brown,
460: Nucl. Phys. A\textbf{625}, 372 (1997).
461: \bibitem{PDG} W. -M. Yao \emph{et al.}, J. Phys. G \textbf{33}, 1
462: (2006).
463: \bibitem{wang} Q. L. Wang, \emph{et al.}, Europhys. Lett., \textbf{75}, 36 (2006)
464: \bibitem{expk} W. Scheinast et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{96}, 072301 (2006).
465:
466: \end{thebibliography}
467:
468:
469: \end{document}
470: