text:
# Dephasing of Aharonov-Bohm oscillations in a mesoscopic ring with a magnetic impurity

## Abstract

We present a detailed analysis of the Aharonov-Bohm interference oscillations manifested through transmission of an electron in a mesoscopic ring with a magnetic impurity atom inserted in one of its arms. The electron interacts with the impurity through the exchange interaction leading to exchange spin-flip scattering. Transmission in the spin-flipped and spin-unflipped channels are explicitly calculated. We show that the spin-flipper acts as a dephasor in spite of absence of any inelastic scattering. The spin-conductance (related to spin-polarized transmission coefficient) is asymmetric in the flux reversal as opposed to the two probe conductance which is symmetric under flux reversal.

Quantum transport in open mesoscopic systems has attracted considerable attention in the last two decades . In this area, the study of phase coherent transmission of electrons in the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) ring occupies a prominent place . Study of dephasing  of electrons in this geometry is very timely  to understand basic issues related to quantum phenomena. By introducing a magnetic impurity atom (to be referred to as the spin-flipper, or the flipper, for short) in one arm of the ring, one can couple the spin of the electron ($`\stackrel{}{\sigma }`$) to the spin of the flipper ($`\stackrel{}{S}`$) via the exchange interaction . This leads to scattering of the electron in which the spin state of the electron and the impurity is changed without any exchange of energy leading to reduction of interference. Let the electron be incident from the left reservoir with its spin pointing “up” (see Fig. 1). The spin of the electron passing through the upper arm may or may not be flipped by the flipper. In the case that the spin is unflipped, one would expect the usual AB-oscillations of the transmission due to interference of the partial waves passing through the upper and the lower branches of the ring. However, in the case that the spin is flipped, one would think, guided by naive intuition, that a path detection has taken place and hence one would be led to conclude that the interference pattern for the spin-down component would be wiped out. This is true provided we consider only two forward propagating partial waves. However, there are infinitely many partial waves in this geometry which are to be superposed to get the total transmission. These arise due to the multiple reflections from the junctions and the impurity site. Consider, for example, an incident spin-up particle moving in the upper arm which is flipped at the impurity site and gets reflected to finally traverse the lower arm before being transmitted. Naturally, this partial wave will interfere with the spin-flipped component transmitted along the upper arm. This results in non-zero transmission for the spin-flipped electron. Thus on taking into account the multiple reflections (more than just two partial waves) the presence of magnetic impurity does not lead to ”which-path” information. However, the magnetic impurity acts as a dephasor .

In this work we show that the amplitude of AB-oscillations is reduced by the flipper causing dephasing. We study the problem using the quantum waveguide theory approach  and the spin degree of freedom of the electron is dealt with in line with ref. . We consider an impurity consisting of a flipper capable of existing in M different discrete internal spin states and located at a particular position on the upper arm of the ring (see Fig. 1). The spin $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }`$ of the electron couples to the flipper spin $`\stackrel{}{S}`$ via an exchange interaction $`J\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{S}\delta (xl_3)`$. The magnetic flux threading the ring is denoted by $`\varphi `$ and is related to the vector potential $`A=\varphi /l`$, $`l`$ being the ring circumference . During passage of the electron through the ring, the total spin angular momentum and its $`z`$-component remain conserved. We analyze the nature of spin-up/down and total transmission (reflection) coefficients. For this we consider the incident electron to be spin-polarized in the up-direction. Apart from dephasing we show that up/down-transmission coefficients are asymmetric in flux reversal, i.e., total spin polarization (related to spin conductance ) is asymmetric in flux reversal. As expected we find that the total transmission coefficient which is the sum of spin-up and spin-down transmission coefficients is symmetric in the flux reversal.

Let $`l_2`$ be the length of the lower arm of the ring and the impurity atom be placed at a distance $`l_3`$ from the junction J1, $`l_4`$ being the remaining segment length of the upper arm. The various segments of the ring and its leads are labelled as shown in Fig. 1 and the wave functions in these segments carry the corresponding subscripts. The wave functions in the five segments for a left-incident spin-up electron can be written as follows:

$`\psi _1`$ $`=`$ $`(e^{ikx}+r_ue^{ikx})\chi _m\alpha +`$ (2)
$`r_de^{ikx}\chi _{m+1}\beta ,`$
$`\psi _2`$ $`=`$ $`(A_ue^{ik_1x}+B_ue^{ik_2x})\chi _m\alpha +`$ (4)
$`(A_de^{ik_1x}+B_de^{ik_2x})\chi _{m+1}\beta ,`$
$`\psi _3`$ $`=`$ $`(C_ue^{ik_1x}+D_ue^{ik_2x})\chi _m\alpha +`$ (6)
$`(C_de^{ik_1x}+D_de^{ik_2x})\chi _{m+1}\beta ,`$
$`\psi _4`$ $`=`$ $`(E_ue^{ik_1x}+F_ue^{ik_2x})\chi _m\alpha +`$ (8)
$`(E_de^{ik_1x}+F_de^{ik_2x})\chi _{m+1}\beta ,`$
$`\psi _5`$ $`=`$ $`t_ue^{ikx}\chi _m\alpha +t_de^{ikx}\chi _{m+1}\beta .`$ (9)
where $`k_1=k+(e\varphi /\mathrm{}cl)`$, $`k_2=k(e\varphi /\mathrm{}cl)`$, $`k`$ is the wave-vector of incident electron. The subscripts $`u`$ and $`d`$ represent “up” and “down” spin states of the electron with the corresponding spinors $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ respectively (i.e., $`\sigma _z\alpha =\frac{1}{2}\alpha `$, $`\sigma _z\beta =\frac{1}{2}\beta `$) and $`\chi _m`$ denotes the wave function of the impurity  with $`S_z=m`$ (i.e., $`S_z\chi _m=m\chi _m`$). The reflected (transmitted) waves have amplitudes $`r_u`$ ($`t_u`$) and $`r_d`$ ($`t_d`$) corresponding to the “up” and “down” spin components respectively. Continuity of the wave functions and the current conservation at the junctions J1 and J2 imply the following boundary conditions.

$`\psi _1(x=0)=\psi _2(x=0),`$ (10)
$`\psi _1(x=0)=\psi _3(x=0),`$ (11)
$`\psi _1^{}(x=0)=\psi _2^{}(x=0)+\psi _3^{}(x=0),`$ (12)
$`\psi _3^{}(x=l_3)\psi _4^{}(x=l_3)=G(\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{S})\psi _3(x=l_3),`$ (13)
$`\psi _3(x=l_3)=\psi _4(x=l_4),`$ (14)
$`\psi _4(x=l_3+l_4)=\psi _5(x=0),`$ (15)
$`\psi _2(x=l_2)=\psi _5(x=0),`$ (16)
$`\psi _2^{}(x=l_2)+\psi _4^{}(x=l_3+l_4)=\psi _5^{}(x=0).`$ (17)
Here $`G=2mJ/\mathrm{}^2`$ is the coupling constant indicative of the “strength” of the spin-exchange interaction. The primes denote the spatial derivatives of the wave functions. Equations (2) along with the boundary conditions (10) were solved to obtain the amplitudes $`t_u`$, $`t_d`$, $`r_u`$ and $`r_d`$. Owing to the large length of the expressions in the following we confine ourselves to the graphical interpretation of the results. We have taken the flipper to be a spin-half object ($`M=2`$) situated symmetrically at the center of the upper arm, i.e., $`l_3=l_4`$. Now, depending upon the initial state of the flipper we have possibility of either spin-flip scattering ($`\sigma _z=1/2,S_z=1/2`$) or no spin-flip scattering ($`\sigma _z=1/2,S_z=1/2`$), as demanded by the conservation of the total spin and its $`z`$-component. In the case of no-spin-flip scattering ($`\sigma _z=1/2,S_z=1/2`$) the problem at hand reduces to that of simple potential scattering from the impurity. We have set $`\mathrm{}=2m=1`$ and throughout the value of interaction strength $`G`$ is given in dimensionless units. The parameters used for the analysis are mentioned in the figure captions.

To begin with we take a look at the symmetry properties of the transport coefficients in spin-flip scattering case where the electron spin is opposite to the flipper spin. It is worth noting that due to the presence of spin degree of freedom the problem in hand although one-dimensional becomes a multichannel problem. Figure 2 shows the spin-up reflection coefficient $`R_u=|r_u|^2`$, spin-down reflection coefficient $`R_d=|r_d|^2`$ and total reflection coefficient $`R=R_u+R_d`$ as a function of the magnetic flux parameter $`\eta =\varphi /\varphi _0`$, $`\varphi _0`$ being the flux quantum $`hc/e`$. We clearly see the AB-oscillations with flux periodicity of $`2\pi \varphi _0`$. All three reflection coefficients are symmetric in the flux reversal as expected on general grounds. In Fig. 3 we plot the spin-up transmission coefficient $`T_u=|t_u|^2`$ (thin line), spin-down transmission coefficient $`T_d=|t_d|^2`$ (dashed line) and total transmission coefficient $`T=T_u+T_d`$ (thick line) versus $`\eta `$. It unambiguously shows that though the total transmission $`T`$ (related to the two-terminal electrical conductance) is symmetric in flux reversal the spin-up $`T_u`$ and spin-down $`T_d`$ components are asymmetric under flux reversal. These transmission coefficients show AB-oscillations with flux periodicity of $`2\pi \varphi _0`$. We have verified this behavior of the reflection and transmission coefficients for various values of wave vector $`k`$ of the incident electron and impurity strength $`G`$. These observations are consistent with the reciprocity relations for transport in multichannel systems  and are a consequence of the general symmetry properties of the Hamiltonian . The transmission coefficient at flux $`\varphi `$ for the case when the incident particle is spin-up and the impurity is spin-down is equal to the transmission coefficient for the case when incident particle is spin-down and impurity is spin-up but the flux direction is reversed. For the spin-polarized transport the total polarization $`T_uT_d`$ is related to the spin-conductance . The above symmetry properties imply that the spin-conductance is asymmetric under the flux reversal. It should be noted that at zero temperature the total electrical conductance is calculated by summing up with equal weight-age the total transmission coefficients for all the four cases, i.e., $`\sigma _z=\pm 1/2`$ and $`S_z=\pm 1/2`$.

As discussed in the introduction, due to multiple reflections the presence of a spin-flipper in one arm does not lead to ”which-path” information. This would have implied the complete blocking of spin-down transmission. In contrast we clearly observe the AB-oscillations for the case of $`T_d`$ originating from multiple reflections. We now address the question of dephasing due to the spin-flipper. To quantify dephasing , we calculate the amplitude of AB oscillations (also referred to as visibility factor) by taking the difference between the maximum and the minimum of total transmission coefficient as a function of flux $`\varphi `$ over one period of the oscillation. A plot of the variation of the amplitude of oscillation of total transmission $`T`$ with the interaction strength $`G`$ for the two cases, no spin-flip scattering ($`S=1/2m=1/2`$) and spin-flip scattering ($`S=1/2m=1/2`$), is shown in figure Fig.4 with dashed line and thick line respectively. Note, however, the signature of dephasing is that the amplitude of AB oscillation of transmission coefficient for the spin-flip case is always smaller than that for the no spin-flip case for all non-zero values of coupling strength $`G`$. In other words the reduction of amplitude of AB oscillations is stronger for the spin-flip scattering case. We have verified the above observation for other parameters in the problem. Thus the presence of spin-flipper reduces or dephases the AB-oscillations and it acts as a dephasor.

At this point we are inclined to think that the harmonic components of the total transmission $`T(\eta )`$ in $`\eta =\varphi /\varphi _0`$ might be able to shed more light on the issue. So, with the hope of extracting some systematics we plot the $`n^{th}`$ harmonic component $`a_n=_0^{2\pi }T(\eta )cos(n\eta )𝑑\eta `$ for $`n=1,2,3\mathrm{}`$ as a function of strength $`G`$ for the spin-flip scattering as well as no spin-flip scattering cases. The plots are shown in Fig. 5 for first four harmonic components. As can be seen the harmonic components do not show any systematics in the sense that the higher harmonic components can dominate over the lower harmonic components at certain values of strength $`G`$ for spin-flip scattering as well as no spin-flip scattering cases. Also, the $`n^{th}`$ harmonic component for spin-flip scattering could dominate over that of the no spin-flip scattering component. These features of the harmonic components are manifestations of the multiple scattering nature of the transport in such ballistic systems as against the observation of domination of lowest harmonic component ($`n=1`$) in the case of transport in the presence of evanescent modes . Guided by the naive intuition mentioned earlier we would have expected the lowest harmonic to dominate. This reiterates the important role played by the reflection at the impurity site. We would like to emphasize that irrespective of the behavior of the harmonic components (say for a particular case $`n^{th}`$ harmonic component in the spin-flip case is dominant over the same $`n^{th}`$ harmonic component for no-spin-flip case) the AB-oscillations of the total transmission are always dephased in the spin-flip case.

In order to make sure that nothing unusual happens at other energies we study the $`T`$, $`T_u`$ and $`T_d`$ as functions of $`kl`$ for the case of spin-flip scattering. Figure 6 reveals an interesting fact, namely at $`kl=2\pi +4n\pi ,n=0,1,2\mathrm{}`$ the $`T_d`$ component vanishes independent of the value of interaction strength $`G`$. In the $`\eta 0`$ case this happens at $`kl=4n\pi ,n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$. At these values of the incident wave-vectors the electron wave function at the impurity site happens to be zero. As a result the electron does not interact with the impurity at all and consequently there is no spin-flip scattering at these energies. However, these k-points are to be distinguished from those at which although $`T_d`$ is zero but in addition $`T_u=1`$, because at these resonant energies the restriction $`T+R=1`$ forces $`T_d,R_u`$ and $`R_d`$ to be zero.

In conclusion, we have studied in detail the nature of AB-oscillations in mesoscopic ring in the presence of a spin-flipper in one of its arms. We have shown that this acts as a dephasor. The presence of magnetic impurity makes the polarized transmission coefficient asymmetric in flux reversal whereas the total transmission coefficient is symmetric in line with the theoretical expectations. Further case of asymmetrically placed flipper, spin-flipper with higher number of internal states and spin-flippers in both arms of the ring are under investigation for studying the nature of resonances, phase-shifts and dephasing.


format: text

text:
# Spectral Models of Convection-Dominated Accretion Flows

## 1 Introduction

At luminosities less than a few per cent of the Eddington luminosity, black holes can accrete via an advection-dominated accretion flow, or ADAF (Ichimaru 1977; Rees et al. 1982; Narayan & Yi 1994, 1995; Abramowicz et al. 1995; see Kato, Fukue & Mineshige 1998 and Narayan, Mahadevan & Quataert 1999 for reviews). Analytical calculations have shown that such flows should be convectively unstable (Narayan & Yi 1994, 1995; see also Begelman & Meier 1982); the instability has been confirmed in numerical simulations (Igumenshchev, Chen & Abramowicz 1996; Igumenshchev & Abramowicz 1999, 2000; Stone, Pringle & Begelman 1999; Igumenshchev, Abramowicz & Narayan 2000).

Igumenshchev & Abramowicz (1999, 2000) found that convection is strong whenever the viscosity parameter $`\alpha `$ is small, roughly $`\alpha 0.1`$. Such “convection-dominated accretion flows,” or CDAFs, have a very different structure than ADAFs (Stone et al. 1999). The density of the accreting gas varies as $`\rho R^{1/2}`$ (where $`R`$ is the radius) rather than $`\rho R^{3/2}`$, and the mean radial velocity varies as $`vR^{3/2}`$ rather than $`vR^{1/2}`$ (Narayan, Igumenshchev & Abramowicz 2000, hereafter NIA).

NIA showed that, in the numerical simulations, the Reynolds stress due to convection is negative, which implies that convection moves angular momentum inwards rather than outwards. This property of convection was discussed in the context of thin accretion disks by Ryu & Goodman (1992) and Stone & Balbus (1996). In the case of a CDAF, convection is so strong that the angular momentum it transports inwards nearly cancels the normal outward transport by viscosity (NIA; Quataert & Gruzinov 2000). As a result, one has a nearly static accretion flow in which most of the gas circulates in convective eddies rather than accreting onto the central object. For fixed boundary conditions at large radii the mass accretion rate in a CDAF is thus much smaller than in a non-convecting ADAF or a Bondi flow.

In this paper we highlight observational consequences of CDAF models, focusing in particular on spectra. Some of our results are similar to those of Di Matteo et al. (1999, 2000; DM) and Quataert & Narayan (1999a; QN) who followed up the proposal of Blandford & Begelman (1999; see also Narayan & Yi 1994, 1995) that a significant fraction of the mass in an ADAF would be lost to an outflow/wind, rather than accreting onto the central object. The importance of outflows can be parametrized by a radial density profile, $`\rho R^{3/2+p}`$, with $`pϵ[0,1]`$. The density profile in a CDAF is equivalent to $`p=1`$. Thus DM’s and QN’s spectral models, which considered various values of $`p`$, capture many of the features of the CDAF spectra calculated here; this is discussed in more detail in §4.

Convection in CDAFs transports a luminosity $`L_c10^310^2\dot{M}c^2`$ from small to large radii; the energy is supplied by the small amount of mass accreting onto the black hole. What happens to this energy at large radii? NIA and Igumenshchev & Abramowicz (2000) suggested that some, perhaps most, of the energy might be radiated from the outer regions of the CDAF as thermal bremsstrahlung emission. We present model spectra for such flows.

In the next section we present analytical expressions for the luminosity and bremsstrahlung spectrum of CDAFs (§2). We then show more detailed numerical calculations (§3.1) and compare CDAF models with ADAF models (§3.2). In §4 we summarize and emphasize some implications of our analysis.

## 2 Self-Similar Scalings for Bremsstrahlung Luminosity and Spectrum

In this section we use the self-similar CDAF solution described by Narayan et al. (2000) and Quataert & Gruzinov (2000). We employ Schwarzschild units for the radius, i.e. $`r=R/R_\mathrm{S}`$, where $`R_\mathrm{S}=2GM/c^2=2.95\times 10^5m`$ cm and $`m`$ is the black hole mass in solar units. We assume that the accretion flow extends from an outer radius $`r_{\mathrm{out}}`$ down to an inner radius $`r_{\mathrm{in}}=1`$ (to model a Schwarzschild black hole). The sound speed of a CDAF is nearly virial, $`c_s^20.37c^2/r`$, and the temperature is $`TT_0/r10^{12}\mathrm{K}/r`$; the vertical scale height is thus of order the radius, $`H0.6R`$.

The density of gas in a CDAF is given by

$$\rho =\rho _0r^{1/2}=\rho _{\mathrm{out}}\left(\frac{r}{r_{out}}\right)^{1/2},\rho _0=\rho _{\mathrm{out}}r_{\mathrm{out}}^{1/2}.$$
(1)
We assume that the CDAF is in steady state with a constant mass accretion rate $`\dot{M}`$. Since $`\rho `$ varies as $`r^{1/2}`$, the radial velocity must scale as $`vr^{3/2}`$. We normalize the velocity such that it is equal to $`c`$ at $`r_{\mathrm{in}}`$.

As noted in §1, convection in CDAFs transports energy from small to large radii. We write the convective luminosity as $`L_cϵ_c\dot{M}c^2`$, where $`ϵ_c10^210^3`$ is the convective “efficiency.” Let a fraction $`\eta _c`$ of this energy be radiated at large radii by the gas in the CDAF; this radiation comes out as thermal bremsstrahlung emission. The bremsstrahlung luminosity of the CDAF, $`L_{\mathrm{CDAF}}`$, then satisfies

$$L_{\mathrm{CDAF}}=\eta _cL_\mathrm{c}=\eta _cϵ_c\dot{M}c^2.$$
(2)
For a given $`r_{\mathrm{out}}`$, this relation fixes the value of $`\rho _{\mathrm{out}}`$ and thus $`\dot{M}`$ (see below). Equivalently, for a given $`\dot{M}`$, equation (2) uniquely fixes the outer radius of the CDAF, $`r_{\mathrm{out}}`$. It also implies an observationally interesting correlation between the luminosity and X-ray spectrum of a source.

The simplest possibility we can consider is that $`\eta _c=1`$, which corresponds to all the convected energy being radiated by the CDAF. This may apply to those objects in which the CDAF is formed by the “evaporation” of a thin accretion disk, as has been discussed in the context of ADAFs by several authors (e.g., Meyer & Meyer-Hofmeister 1994; Narayan, McClintock, & Yi 1996; Honma 1996; Meyer, Liu, & Meyer-Hofmeister 2000). If a CDAF is surrounded by a thin disk, and if $`\eta _c<1`$, the convective luminosity impinging on the inner edge of the thin disk would be very much greater than that needed to unbind the disk material. One could imagine that $`L_c`$ would then “eat away” the inner edge of the disk until the condition $`L_{\mathrm{CDAF}}L_c`$ is roughly satisfied. This condition is not guaranteed, however, since another possibility is that $`\eta _c<1`$ and the excess convective energy is used to eject a substantial fraction of the mass evaporated from the disk.

When there is no outer disk, it is unlikely that $`\eta _c`$ will be close to unity. For example, if a black hole accretes spherically from the ISM of a galaxy, as is believed to occur in, e.g., Sgr A\* at the center of our Galaxy (e.g., Melia 1992; Narayan, Yi, & Mahadevan 1995) or elliptical galaxies at the centers of cooling flows (Fabian & Rees 1995; Mahadevan 1997; DM; Quataert & Narayan 1999b), both $`r_{\mathrm{out}}`$ and $`\rho _{\mathrm{out}}`$ are determined by the properties of the host galaxy. It would then require considerable fine-tuning for $`L_{CDAF}`$ to be equal to $`L_c`$. It is more likely that we will have $`L_{\mathrm{CDAF}}<L_c`$, i.e $`\eta _c<1`$. The unradiated energy $`(L_cL_{CDAF})`$ will be transported out, heating the external medium and perhaps driving some of the gas away in an outflow.

The bremsstrahlung luminosity of a CDAF is given by

$$L_{\mathrm{CDAF}}=4\pi R_\mathrm{S}^3_1^{r_{\mathrm{out}}}A\rho ^2T^{1/2}r^2𝑑r,A5\times 10^{20}\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{g}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{K}^{1/2}.$$
(3)
Performing the integral and equating $`L_{\mathrm{CDAF}}`$ to the convective luminosity, we may solve for $`\rho _0`$:

$$\rho _0\frac{\eta _cϵ_\mathrm{c}c^3}{2T_0^{1/2}R_\mathrm{S}A}r_{\mathrm{out}}^{3/2}\frac{10^3}{mr_{\mathrm{out}}^{3/2}}\left(\frac{\eta _cϵ_\mathrm{c}}{10^2}\right)\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3.$$
(4)
Substituting this back into the expression for $`L_{\mathrm{CDAF}}`$ we find that the bremsstrahlung luminosity of the CDAF satisfies

$$l_{\mathrm{CDAF}}\frac{L_{\mathrm{CDAF}}}{L_{\mathrm{Edd}}}r_{\mathrm{out}}^{3/2}\left(\frac{\eta _cϵ_c}{10^2}\right)^2,$$
(5)
where $`L_{\mathrm{Edd}}=1.25\times 10^{38}m\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$. For $`r_{\mathrm{out}}1`$, we see that the luminosity of a CDAF is $`L_{\mathrm{Edd}}`$. Note that equation (5) can also be expressed as a relationship between the accretion rate and outer radius of the CDAF:

$$\dot{m}\frac{\dot{M}}{\dot{M}_{\mathrm{Edd}}}10r_{\mathrm{out}}^{3/2}\left(\frac{\eta _cϵ_c}{10^2}\right),$$
(6)
where $`\dot{M}_{\mathrm{Edd}}=L_{\mathrm{Edd}}/0.1c^210^{18}m`$ g s-1 is the Eddington accretion rate.

A straightforward calculation (ignoring the frequency dependence of the Gaunt factor) shows that the bremsstrahlung spectrum from a CDAF consists of three parts:

$`\nu L_\nu `$ $``$ $`\nu ,h\nu kT_{\mathrm{min}},`$ (7)
$``$ $`\nu ^{3/2},kT_{\mathrm{min}}hvkT_{\mathrm{max}},`$ (8)
$``$ $`\mathrm{exp}(h\nu /kT_{\mathrm{max}}),kT_{\mathrm{max}}h\nu ,`$ (9)
where $`T_{\mathrm{min}}=T(r_{\mathrm{out}})`$ is the minimum electron temperature in the flow, obtained at the outer radius, and $`T_{\mathrm{max}}`$ is the maximal electron temperature, obtained close to the black hole. If we include the Gaunt factor, the slope is shallower than unity for $`h\nu kT_{\mathrm{min}}`$.

The peak of the bremsstrahlung spectrum occurs at

$$h\nu _{\mathrm{peak}}kT_{\mathrm{min}}=\frac{kT_0}{r_{\mathrm{out}}}.$$
(10)
Thus the position of the spectral peak depends on the outer radius. Since the luminosity of the CDAF is also related to the outer radius (eq. 5), we have the following relation between the luminosity and the location of the peak in the bremsstrahlung spectrum:

$$h\nu _{\mathrm{peak}}10\left(\frac{l_{\mathrm{CDAF}}}{10^6}\right)^{2/3}\left(\frac{\eta _cϵ_c}{10^2}\right)^{4/3}\mathrm{keV}.$$
(11)
## 3 Detailed Spectra

The detailed spectra presented in this section were computed using a global dynamical model which includes a sonic transition close to the black hole (Quataert, in preparation). The model corresponds to a viscosity parameter $`\alpha =0.03`$ and has $`ϵ_c=0.0045`$. The profiles of density and temperature in this model are quite close to the self-similar form assumed in the previous section.

In addition to bremsstrahlung emission, the spectral calculations presented here include synchrotron radiation and Compton scattering, assuming thermal electrons. These processes have been included by the methods described in Narayan, Barret & McClintock (1997). Cooling from atomic processes has also been included, which can be important for $`T<10^8`$ K (i.e $`r>10^4`$).

In each model, the electron temperature $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ was computed self-consistently at each radius. Specifically, we solved an energy equation as a function of $`r`$ and ensured that the heating, cooling and energy advection of the electrons are in balance. For the heating, we assumed that a fraction $`\delta `$ of the viscous dissipation goes directly into the electrons.

### 3.1 Models with a Pure CDAF

Figure 1 shows model spectra corresponding to a CDAF around a $`10^8M_{}`$ black hole. All the models shown have $`\eta _c=1`$ and either $`\delta =0.01`$ or $`\delta =0.5`$. The various curves correspond to different values of the outer radius, from $`r_{\mathrm{out}}=10^6`$ down to $`300`$; the corresponding values of $`\dot{m}`$ are given in the caption to the figure. (The precise values of $`\dot{m}`$ depend on details such as the values of $`\alpha `$ and $`ϵ_c`$, and the global model of the gas dynamics, and probably should not be taken too literally. The trends are, however, likely to be robust.)

The main features discussed in §2 are clearly seen in Fig. 1. Consider first the models with $`\delta =0.01`$, shown by dashed lines. We see that the X-ray spectrum is dominated by bremsstrahlung emission and consists of two distinct power-law segments on either side of a peak. The location of the peak is highly correlated with the luminosity, and follows the scaling given in equation (10).

At low frequencies, in the radio/submm band, there is a weak secondary peak in the spectrum which arises from synchrotron emission by the hot electrons. (This emission was computed assuming that the magnetic pressure in the plasma is a tenth that of the gas, cf. Quataert & Narayan 1999c.) The synchrotron peak in the models is much weaker than in corresponding ADAF models (Narayan, Mahadevan & Quataert 1997), where the synchrotron emission is often stronger than the bremsstrahlung emission. This is because the synchrotron emission comes from relativistic electrons close to the black hole, whereas the bremsstrahlung emission is from large radii. For a given outer density (and hence bremsstrahlung emission), the electron density at small radii in a CDAF is much smaller than that in an ADAF, causing the synchrotron emission in the CDAF to be strongly suppressed. This point was made by DM and QN in the context of winds from ADAFs, which also cause a reduction in the central density.

For higher values of $`\dot{M}`$ (or luminosity), Compton-scattering of synchrotron photons becomes important; this fills in the valley between the synchrotron and bremsstrahlung peaks.

The ions in the above models are close to virial: $`T_i10^{12}`$ K near the black hole. The electrons are comparatively cool, with a maximum temperature $`T_{e,max}<10^{10}`$ K. Models with $`\delta =0.5`$ (solid lines in Fig. 1) have much stronger electron heating and therefore significantly hotter electrons: $`T_{e,max}10^{11}`$ K. This causes the synchrotron peak to become much more pronounced compared to the $`\delta =0.01`$ models, though the emission is still less than in an equivalent ADAF model. The increased synchrotron emission and the hotter electrons both lead to an enhanced contribution from Compton scattering. Nevertheless, the peak of the spectrum is still dominated by bremsstrahlung emission, and so the scaling of the position of the peak with luminosity survives.

Figure 2 shows spectra for $`\delta =0.01`$ and $`\delta =0.5`$ for several values of the convective efficiency, $`\eta _c`$: the two sets of models correspond to $`\dot{m}=10^4`$ (solid lines) and $`10^6`$ (dashed lines). In all the model sequences the synchrotron emission in the radio is relatively unaffected by changes in $`\eta _c`$; this is because the synchrotron radiation arises primarily at small radii and depends only on $`\dot{m}`$ and $`\delta `$. For the large $`\dot{m}`$ model, varying $`\eta _c`$ also has little effect on the X-ray spectrum. This is because most of the X-ray emission arises from small radii via inverse Compton scattering, rather than from large radii via bremsstrahlung. By contrast, for smaller $`\dot{m}`$ (and/or smaller $`\delta `$), inverse Compton emission is less important. The X-ray emission is then dominated by bremsstrahlung, which decreases with decreasing $`\eta _c`$.

Figure 3 shows the predicted X-ray photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as a function of X-ray luminosity in Eddington units for $`\delta =0.5`$. Four sets of models are shown: $`\eta _c=1,0.5,0.2,0.1`$. The 2–5 keV spectral indices were calculated by comparing the model luminosities at the two ends of the range, 2 keV and 5 keV, respectively. Note the large increase of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with decreasing luminosity. This arises because the peak in the spectrum moves to lower energies with decreasing luminosity (cf. eq. 10). Because the value of $`\eta _c`$ is unknown, there is some uncertainty regarding the value of the luminosity at which the transition in the value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ occurs . For the range of $`\eta _c`$ considered here, covering an order of magnitude, we find that for $`L_X/L_{Edd}10^7`$ the X-ray spectrum is hard, with a photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }2`$, while for luminosities $`L_X/L_{Edd}10^9`$ the spectrum is significantly softer, with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }3.5`$.

### 3.2 CDAF vs. ADAF

Figure 4 shows a comparison of CDAF and ADAF spectral models for $`\delta =0.01`$ and $`\delta =0.5`$. The accretion rates in the models are adjusted so that the $`1`$ keV X-ray luminosities are equal to either $`10^{37}`$ or $`10^{40}`$ erg s-1. In order to uniquely fix the models, we set $`\eta _c=1`$ in the CDAF models and choose the outer radii of the ADAF modles so that local viscous dissipation balances radiative cooling at this radius ($`f1/2`$ in the notation of Narayan & Yi 1994).

For small $`\delta `$, Figure 4 shows that the CDAF and ADAF spectra are quite different. The X-ray emission in the CDAF is dominated by bremsstrahlung, while the emission in the ADAF is dominated by inverse Compton emission. In addition, the CDAF has a much lower synchrotron flux in the radio, because the density of gas close to the black hole is much smaller.

For very low luminosities ($`<10^8L_{Edd}`$), the difference between the CDAF and ADAF models at large $`\delta `$ is similar to that at small $`\delta `$. By contrast, for luminosities $`>10^6L_{Edd}`$ the CDAF and ADAF spectra are very similar if $`\delta `$ is large. This is because the entire spectrum is produced over a small range of radii close to the black hole. Fixing the $`1`$ keV X-ray luminosity determines the properties of the flow in this region and thus the entire spectrum is rather similar.

## 4 Discussion

The main results of this paper are given in equations (6)–(10) and in the Figures. Equation (10) shows that a CDAF has a peak in $`\nu L_\nu `$ in the X-ray band, whose position is correlated with the Eddington-scaled luminosity. Correspondingly, the spectral index of the X-ray spectrum varies with luminosity. At high luminosities, the peak in the spectrum is at higher energies than the typical band in which observations are carried out (few keV), and the spectrum is hard with a photon index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of order 2 (Fig. 3). At lower luminosities, the peak shifts to lower energies, and the observed band would correspond to energies above the peak. The spectrum then becomes very soft, with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ taking values of order 3.5.

There is some uncertainty in the quantitative details predicted here because the values of two parameters are not well determined. The parameter $`ϵ_c`$ measures the fraction of the rest mass energy of the accreting gas that is carried outward by convection: $`L_c=ϵ_c\dot{M}c^2`$. Our calculations correspond to $`ϵ_c=0.0045`$, as determined from a global CDAF model with viscosity parameter $`\alpha =0.03`$ (Quataert, in preparation). Other values of $`\alpha `$ would give other estimates of $`ϵ_c`$, though the uncertainty in $`ϵ_c`$ is probably no more than a factor of a few either way.

A more serious uncertainty is in the parameter $`\eta _c`$, which measures the fraction of the convected luminosity $`L_c`$ that is radiated by the CDAF at large radii as thermal bremsstrahlung emission: $`L_{CDAF}=\eta _cL_c=\eta _cϵ_c\dot{M}c^2`$. Figure 2 shows results spanning a range of $`\eta _c`$ from 0.01 to 1. If $`\eta _c`$ is as small as 0.01 or even smaller, an accreting black hole would have a very small X-ray luminosity from thermal bremsstrahlung emission and would be extremely difficult to observe. This might explain highly underluminous galactic nuclei such as that in our own Galaxy. For models with low $`\eta _c`$, a relevant question is what happens to the part of the energy convected outwards that is not radiated, ($`[1\eta _c]L_cL_c`$). If this energy is transported out to an external medium and radiated there, that contribution may dominate the observed spectrum (assuming the beam of the telescope is larger than the size of the emitting region). The luminosity of the source would then be larger than we have predicted and the spectrum would be softer.

The spectral models of CDAFs presented here are qualitatively similar to the ADIOS (ADAF + wind) models presented by DM and QN. The relative prominence of bremsstrahlung emission in the X-ray band and the suppression of synchrotron emission in the radio (as suggested by observations; see DM) are characteristic of density profiles flatter than the ADAF scaling of $`\rho r^{3/2}`$ (be they CDAF or ADIOS). In fact, the qualitative similarity of ADIOS and CDAF spectra implies that direct signatures of outflowing gas (and measrements of outflow mass rates) would be needed to confirm the ADIOS model. The primary difference between the CDAF and ADIOS models is that we have a unique radial density profile ($`\rho r^{1/2}`$) in a CDAF, instead of a family of models ($`\rho r^{3/2+p}`$ with $`0<p<1`$) in an ADIOS; also, the energy which powers bremsstrahlung emission at large radii is provided by convective transport from small radii in a CDAF, rather than by local viscous dissipation in an ADIOS.

All the models presented in this paper correspond to a two-temperature plasma. For the models with $`\delta =0.5`$, however, the temperatures of the ions and electrons are similar, differing by less than a factor of 10. We have computed models with a one-temperature plasma, assuming that some plasma process other than Coulomb collisions rapidly equilibrates the ion and electron temperatures (cf Begelman & Chiueh 1988). The results are not very different from those obtained with two-temperature models with $`\delta =0.5`$. Comptonization does, however, become more important relative to bremsstrahlung, especially for low values of $`\eta _c`$. In addition, the synchrotron emission in the radio is somewhat more prominent.

An important assumption of our analysis is that the electrons are thermal. Because of the low density in a CDAF, thermalization through Coulomb collisions and synchrotron self-absorption is virtually non-existent (cf. Mahadevan & Quataert 1997); it is therefore possible to retain a power-law distribution of electrons. Moreover, such nonthermal acceleration is expected in the collisionless magnetized plasmas present in CDAFs. A power law tail of electrons would significantly modify the predicted synchrotron spectrum (e.g., Mahadevan 1998; Özel, Psaltis, & Narayan 2000). In addition, the power-law electrons could contribute to X-ray emission through either synchrotron or nonthermal inverse Compton emission. Depending on the uncertain efficiency of electron acceleration, this nonthermal emission could be more important than bremsstrahlung emission, particularly for small values of $`\eta _c`$.

Models in which thin accretion disks “evaporate” to form hot inner flows have received considerable attention in the context of dwarf novae (Meyer & Meyer-Hofmeister 1994), soft X-ray transients in quiescence (Narayan, McClintock, & Yi 1996; Honma 1996; Meyer, Liu, & Meyer-Hofmeister 2000, Rozanska & Czerny 2000), and low luminosity AGN (Lasota et al. 1996; Quataert et al. 1999). The energy for “evaporation” is ultimately thought to originate in the hot inner flow. Convection in CDAFs transports a significant amount of energy to large radii. CDAFs should thus be much more efficient than ADAFs at evaporating the outer disk. The implications of convective energy transport for theoretical models of the transition from thin disks to hot flows deserve further investigation.

Acknowledgment: The authors are grateful to an anonymous referee for a number of suggestions which helped improve the presentation. This work was supported in part by grants PHY 9507695 and AST 9820686 from the National Science Foundation. GB was supported by a Frank Knox Memorial Fellowship from Harvard University. EQ is supported by NASA through Chandra Fellowship PF9-10008, awarded by the Chandra X–ray Center, which is operated by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory for NASA under contract NAS 8-39073


text:
# Hadron structure after 25 years of QCD

## 1 INTRODUCTION

In the space allotted it is impossible to do justice to more than 40 years of work on hadron structure. Rather than attempt this, we take very seriously the appearance of QCD in the title and concentrate on the guidance that recent developments in our understanding of QCD provide for future developments in modelling hadron structure. For reviews of the vast amount of existing information on hadron models we refer to recent conferences on hadron structure.

In order to place hadron models firmly in the context of QCD, we begin with a summary of the properties of the non-perturbative vacuum, upon which everything else is built. We then recall some lessons from heavy quark systems before turning to the more complicated case of light quarks, where chiral symmetry plays a key role. We finish with a brief outlook concerning the theoretical and experimental possibilities in the next decade.

## 2 THE QCD VACUUM

It is by now firmly established that the ground state of QCD is a highly non-trivial state, including both quark and gluon condensates. For a purely gluonic version of QCD the vacuum energy density, $`ϵ_{\mathrm{vac}}`$, is:

$$ϵ_{\mathrm{vac}}=\frac{9}{32}0|\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2|0=0.5\mathrm{GeV}/\mathrm{fm}^3.$$
(1)
In comparison with phenomenological estimates of the energy difference between the perturbative and non-perturbative vacuum states, such as $`B`$ in the MIT bag model, this is an order of magnitude larger. Thus either the simple idea of the perturbative vacuum being fully restored inside a hadron is incorrect or the situation is rather more complicated than usually assumed.

The light quark condensates, $`\overline{u}u`$ and $`\overline{d}d`$, in the non-perturbative vacuum are approximately equal and take a value around (-240 MeV)3. A quantitative understanding of these values requires a treatment that in nuclear physics terms would involve at least Hartree-Fock plus RPA . The underlying chiral symmetry of QCD (for massless $`u`$ and $`d`$ quarks) requires that, if the vacuum is to have a non-trivial quark condensate, there must be massless Goldstone bosons with the quantum numbers of the pion. As we move away from the massless limit, these Goldstone bosons have masses which behave as:

$$m_\pi ^2\frac{\overline{m}_u+\overline{m}_d}{2}=\overline{m}.$$
(2)
(In fact, while this relation is only formally correct near $`\overline{m}=0`$, lattice simulations show that it holds for $`m_\pi `$ as large as 1 GeV.)

By studying the energy of two static sources of opposite color charge on a lattice, it has been shown that purely gluonic QCD leads to a linearly rising potential at large separations, $`V(R)=\sigma R`$. This observation naturally explains the observed Regge trajectories and effectively “confines” heavy color sources. Supplemented by a short-range, one-gluon exchange potential this naturally yields a potential of the Cornell type, which has proven phenomenologically so successful for heavy quark-anti-quark pairs:

$$V_{Q\overline{Q}}(r)=C\frac{\alpha }{r}+\sigma r.$$
(3)
A linearly rising potential at large separations can be understood in terms of a non-perturbative vacuum which has dia-electric properties. By analogy with the Meissner effect in superconductors, one can think of the QCD vacuum containing a condensate of color magnetic monopoles which shield the lines of color electric force into a tube of constant cross section, no matter how far apart the color sources are located. Such a picture is supported by lattice simulations involving Abelian projection, but the final details are not yet settled . On the other hand, in the real world this situation is altered dramatically by the presence of light quarks which can break the string once the energy stored becomes too great, through the process $`Q\overline{Q}Q\overline{q}+\overline{Q}q`$ – e.g., for charm quarks, $`c\overline{c}D\overline{D}`$. For mesons which are stable under strong interactions, virtual processes like this have a quantitative effect – e.g., $`f_B=220`$ MeV in quenched QCD (QQCD), whereas it is 260 MeV in full QCD – but do not change the qualitative picture .

### 2.1 Insights from lattice QCD

It has recently proven possible to compare various intermediate stages of lattice calculations, such as the quark and gluon propagators, with the forms commonly used in models. In this way one can refine the model building process using QCD itself. Of course, intermediate steps such as the quark and gluon propagators are not physical and one must specifically fix the gauge in order to make a meaningful comparison. The gauge most commonly used is Landau gauge and techniques have been developed to fix lattice quantities in this gauge. Figure 1 shows the result for the non-trivial momentum dependence of the gluon propagator (times $`q^2`$) , $`q^2D(q^2)`$, which should go to a constant at large $`q^2`$ (up to perturbative QCD logs). From Fig. 1 we see that the lattice simulation shows that the gluon propagator is clearly non-perturbative for $`q^2<4`$GeV2. Even more interesting from the point of view of model building is the fact that the gluon propagator is not enhanced as $`q^20`$. While this agrees with some recent Schwinger-Dyson studies of QCD , it is in disagreement with at least a naive interpretation of a great deal of phenomenological work related to dynamical chiral symmetry breaking within the Schwinger-Dyson formalism . Clearly this sort of interplay between phenomenological models and QCD itself has just begun and we have a great deal to learn from it.

Again with Landau gauge fixing, there have been some preliminary studies of the quark propagator in QCD. For Euclidean $`p^2`$ one can write the quark propagator as:

$$S_E(p)=\frac{Z(p^2)}{i\gamma ^\mu p_\mu +M(p^2)}.$$
(4)
The lattice simulations, which have so far been carried out with relatively large current quark masses, show a clear enhancement in the infrared . For example, for a current quark mass of order 110 MeV, the simulations suggest $`M(0)400`$ MeV, decreasing to around 300 MeV in the chiral limit. This is certainly consistent with the general idea of the constituent quark model and indeed this result provides a firm theoretical foundation for the concept within QCD. Of course, it also indicates where the concept breaks down and it is clear that in processes involving significant momentum transfer it will be necessary to go beyond the simple idea of a fixed mass. The similarity of the mass function, $`M(p^2)`$, to that found in Schwinger-Dyson studies  suggests that the latter may be a promising phenomenological extension of the constituent quark idea.

## 3 NON-RELATIVISTIC QUARK MODEL

The non-relativistic quark model, which combines the concept of a massive constituent quark with a linear, pairwise confining interaction and a short distance, spin-dependent hyperfine interaction, has had enormous success in correlating a vast amount of hadronic data. It provides an excellent basis for understanding the spectrum of mesons and baryons. Most notably, it has also provided a very natural explanation of why some states expected in the naive quark model have not been seen yet . While until now this explanation has seemed convincing, it has not been seriously tested experimentally. This is now in process of change with Jefferson Lab due to produce a tremendous quantity of new, high duty factor data.

Amongst the key issues confronting the simple quark model, we mention relativity, the spin-orbit problem and chiral symmetry. It is quite clear that the approximation that the constituent $`u`$,$`d`$ and $`s`$ quarks are non-relativistic cannot be quantitatively reliable. For quarks of mass 300–400 MeV confined a volume of radius less than 1 fm, it is clear that $`p/M`$ is of order one. The relativistic extension of the naive quark model, developed by Capstick, Isgur and others  has overcome this problem, with a resultant improvement in various transition form factors.

The spin-orbit problem has been around since the beginnings of the quark model, but has been of considerable interest recently in the light of claims that pseudoscalar meson exchange, rather than gluon exchange, as a source of hyperfine splitting would resolve the problem . On the other hand, as noted by Isgur , with a Lorentz scalar confining potential one will automatically have large spin-orbit forces. The spin-orbit force arising from the usual one gluon exchange interaction can cancel this in the meson spectrum but not in the baryon spectrum. Thus the spin-orbit problem for the baryon spectrum is still very much with us – see however Ref. .

As we have already seen in connection with the structure of the non-perturbative vacuum, chiral symmetry is expected to play a major role in determining hadron structure for light quarks. Unfortunately the constituent quark model destroys that symmetry rather badly. We shall turn to a specific discussion of the role of chiral symmetry later, but simply note here that a quantitative discussion of hadronic properties is not possible unless measures are taken to ensure that the theory respects chiral symmetry.

### 3.1 Hybrids

In a more sophisticated treatment of hadron spectroscopy the simple linear confining potential in Eq.(3) may be replaced by a flux tube model. This has the advantage that the confining potential then becomes truly dynamical and in particular can be excited. Excitations of the flux tube can result in a new kind of hadron. The most interesting cases are those where the quantum numbers of the hadron are exotic – e.g., for mesons where they cannot be associated with a $`q\overline{q}`$ system.

The experimental discovery of exotic systems, where the gluons have a genuine structural role, would be a vital step towards a full understanding of QCD. This explains the excitement over the announcement, from E852 at Brookhaven National Lab , of three candidates for hybrid mesons with quantum numbers $`J^{PC}=1^+`$. The $`\pi ^{}(1370)`$ was seen in the $`\pi \eta `$ and $`\pi \eta ^{}`$ channels, the $`\pi ^{}(1640)`$ in $`\pi \eta ^{},\rho \pi `$ and $`f_1\pi `$ and the $`\pi ^{}(2000)`$ in $`a_1\eta `$. These masses are somewhat lower than the values usually reported in lattice simulations, although for the moment the latter tend to be based on quenched QCD . While the interpretation of the BNL data should become clearer over the next few years, the announcement lends even greater urgency to the calls for a future HALL D program at Jefferson Lab.

### 3.2 Glueballs

An even more dramatic prediction of QCD than exotic states is, of course, the possibility of physical particles containing only glue – the glueballs. Lattice simulations suggest that the lowest mass state of pure glue would be the $`0^{++}`$ with a mass of $`1670\pm 20`$ MeV . Experimental searches fave so far found a number of scalar glueball candidates in the mass region 1300 to 1800 MeV. However, the interpretation of the data is badly effected by the fact that in real QCD, with light quarks, no physical state will be pure glue – rather the best one can hope for is an unstable state with only a small $`q\overline{q}`$ component for some (unknown) dynamical reason. We note that the channel coupling effects induced by decay channels such as $`\pi \pi `$ and $`K\overline{K}`$ are also quite controversial from the theoretical point of view. There is clearly room for a great deal of experimental and theoretical work in this field in the future, with a promise of fame and fortune for the unambiguous identification of a glueball state.

## 4 LIGHT QUARKS

As we have already explained, the vast majority of theoretical papers dealing with light quark systems have been based on the constituent quark model. This approach has achieved a great deal and, as we have seen in Sect. 2, there is a clear qualitative connection between this model and the properties of QCD revealed through lattice calculations. Nevertheless, the constituent quark model is better suited to dealing with systems of quarks that are genuinely heavy. Here we take the chiral properties of QCD very seriously, in order to explore the unique features of light quark systems.

### 4.1 Trace Anomaly

If one defines a tensor $`𝒮^\mu =x_\nu \theta ^{\mu \nu }`$, with $`\theta ^{\mu \nu }`$ the energy-momentum tensor of QCD, one finds classically that $`_\mu 𝒮^\mu `$ is zero. However, if this were to hold at the quantum level we would find that the nucleon mass would be zero. Fortunately the divergence of $`𝒮^\mu `$ is no longer zero in quantum field theory because of the trace anomaly and one finds for the nucleon mass:

$$M_N=N|\frac{9}{4}\alpha _s\mathrm{Tr}G^2+m_u\overline{u}u+m_d\overline{d}d+m_s\overline{s}s|N.$$
(5)
By far the dominant term on the rhs of Eq.(5) is the gluon trace . (The $`u`$ and $`d`$ quark mass terms are known to be of order 40-50 MeV from the sigma commutator and while the $`s`$-quark mass term is less well known its not more than 100 MeV or so.)

A full understanding of hadron structure in terms of QCD must involve a reasonable physical interpretation of Eq. (5). For the present it is clear that the nucleon mass arises from non-perturbative gluon interactions and that is certainly reflected there. There are many famous examples of virial theorems which relate apparently different physical quantities and it is likely that such a theorem connects the effective or constituent quark mass appearing in Eq. (4) to the gluon field energy in Eq. (5).

### 4.2 QCD Sum Rules

The QCD sum rules have had considerable success in relating hadron masses to various properties of the non-perturbative vacuum. The famous Ioffe formula for the nucleon mass :

$$M_N=\frac{8\pi ^2}{^2}\overline{q}q,$$
(6)
yields a surprisingly accurate value provided the Borel mass $``$ is taken to be about 1 GeV. It also illustrates clearly the role of the quark condensate in generating a chiral symmetry violating property such as mass. On the other hand, the connection to Eq. (5) is totally unclear. More important, the dependence on $`<\overline{q}q>`$ is incorrect compared with what is found if higher order condensates are included . In addition, the leading non-analytic chiral behaviour of the left and right hand sides of Eq. (6) are inconsistent.

### 4.3 Quenched Lattice QCD

Perhaps the most impressive non-perturbative results for the spectrum of light hadrons has been obtained using quenched lattice QCD. Once the lattice scale (i.e. the lattice spacing, $`a`$) is set by fitting one mass – either that of the $`\rho `$ or $`\varphi `$ meson – the other ground state meson and baryon masses agree with experiment within about 10% . This is a remarkable result, even though one would rather set $`a`$ using the string tension, in which case all the masses would be genuine predictions. On the other hand, the success raises as many questions as it resolves. Since the chiral properties of quenched QCD (QQCD) are quite different from those of full QCD , it becomes vital to understand how one can, nevertheless, obtain such spectacular agreement. Unfortunately, it will not be possible to handle realistic light quark masses for sea quarks (i.e. in quark loops) for quite a few years yet. However, it is known that chiral symmetry plays a vital role in hadron structure and we have some clues as to how it might effect lattice calculations.

### 4.4 Non-Analytic Behaviour

We have already seen that spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking in QCD requires the existence of Goldstone bosons whose masses vanish in the limit of zero quark mass (the chiral limit). As a corollary to this, there must be contributions to hadron properties from Goldstone boson loops. These loops have the unique property that they give rise to terms in an expansion of most hadronic properties as a function of quark mass which are not analytic. As a simple example, consider the nucleon mass. The most important chiral corrections to $`M_N`$ come from the processes $`NN\pi N`$ ($`\sigma _{NN}`$) and $`N\mathrm{\Delta }\pi N`$ ($`\sigma _{N\mathrm{\Delta }}`$). (We will come to what it means to say these are the most important shortly.) We write $`M_N=M_N^{\mathrm{bare}}+\sigma _{NN}+\sigma _{N\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. In the heavy baryon limit one has

$$\sigma _{NN}=\frac{3g_A^2}{16\pi ^2f_\pi ^2}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑k\frac{k^4u^2(k)}{k^2+m_\pi ^2}.$$
(7)
Here $`u(k)`$ is a natural high momentum cut-off which is the Fourier transform of the source of the pion field (e.g. in the cloudy bag model (CBM) it is $`3j_1(kR)/kR`$, with $`R`$ the bag radius ). From the point of view of PCAC it is natural to identify $`u(k)`$ with the axial form-factor of the nucleon, a dipole with mass parameter $`1.02\pm 0.08`$GeV.

Quite independent of the form chosen for the ultra-violet cut-off, one finds that $`\sigma _{NN}`$ is a non-analytic function of the quark mass. The non-analytic piece of $`\sigma _{NN}`$ is independent of the form factor and gives

$$\sigma _{NN}^{LNA}=\frac{3g_A^2}{32\pi f_\pi ^2}m_\pi ^3\overline{m}^{\frac{3}{2}}.$$
(8)
This has a branch point, as a function of $`\overline{m}`$, at $`\overline{m}=0`$. Such terms can only arise from Goldstone boson loops.

### 4.5 Chiral Extrapolations of Lattice Data

It is natural to ask how significant this non-analytic behaviour is in practice. If the pion mass is given in GeV, $`\sigma _{NN}^{LNA}=5.6m_\pi ^3`$ and at the physical pion mass it is just -17 MeV. However, at only three times the physical pion mass, $`m_\pi =420`$MeV, it is -460MeV – half the mass of the nucleon. If one’s aim is to extract physical nucleon properties from lattice QCD calculations this is extremely important. The most sophisticated lattice calculations with dynamical fermions are only just becoming feasible at such low masses and to connect to the physical world one must extrapolate from $`m_\pi 500`$MeV to $`m_\pi =140`$MeV. Clearly one must have control of the chiral behaviour.

Figure 2 shows recent lattice calculations of $`M_N`$ as a function of $`m_\pi ^2`$ from CP-PACS and UKQCD . The dashed line indicates a fit which naively respects the presence of a LNA term,

$$M_N=\alpha +\beta m_\pi ^2+\gamma m_\pi ^3,$$
(9)
with $`\alpha ,\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ fitted to the data. While this gives a very good fit to the data, the chiral coefficient $`\gamma `$ is only -0.761, compared with the value -5.60 required by chiral symmetry. If one insists that $`\gamma `$ be consistent with QCD the best fit one can obtain with this form is the dash-dot curve. This is clearly unacceptable.

An alternative suggested recently by Leinweber et al. , which also involves just three parameters, is to evaluate $`\sigma _{NN}`$ and $`\sigma _{N\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ with the same ultra-violet form factor, with mass parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and to fit $`M_N`$ as

$$M_N=\alpha +\beta m_\pi ^2+\sigma _{NN}(m_\pi ,\mathrm{\Lambda })+\sigma _{N\mathrm{\Delta }}(m_\pi ,\mathrm{\Lambda }).$$
(10)
Using a sharp cut-off ($`u(k)=\theta (\mathrm{\Lambda }k)`$) these authors were able to obtain analytic expressions for $`\sigma _{NN}`$ and $`\sigma _{N\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ which reveal the correct LNA behaviour – and next to leading (NLNA) in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }\pi `$ case, $`\sigma _{N\mathrm{\Delta }}^{NLNA}m_\pi ^4\mathrm{ln}m_\pi `$. These expressions also reveal a branch point at $`m_\pi =M_\mathrm{\Delta }M_N`$, which is important if one is extrapolating from large values of $`m_\pi `$ to the physical value. The solid curve in Fig. 2 is a two parameter fit to the lattice data using Eq.(10), but fixing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ at a value suggested by CBM simulations to be equivalent to the prefered 1 GeV dipole. A small increase in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is necessary to fit the lowest mass data point, at $`m_\pi ^20.1`$ GeV2, but clearly one can describe the data very well while preserving the exact LNA and NLNA behaviour of QCD.

### 4.6 The Sigma Commutator

The analysis of the lattice data for $`M_N`$, incorporating the correct non-analytic behaviour, can yield interesting new information concerning the sigma commutator of the nucleon:

$$\sigma _N=\frac{1}{3}N|[Q_{i5},[Q_{i5},H_{QCD}]]|N=N|\overline{m}(\overline{u}u+\overline{d}d)|N.$$
(11)
This is a direct measure of chiral SU(2) symmetry breaking in QCD, and the widely accepted experimental value is $`45\pm 8`$MeV . (Although there are recent suggestions that it might be as much as 20 MeV larger .) Using the Feynman-Hellmann theorem one can also write

$$\sigma _N=\overline{m}\frac{M_N}{\overline{m}}=m_\pi ^2\frac{M_N}{m_\pi ^2}.$$
(12)
Historically, lattice calculations have evaluated $`<N|(\overline{u}u+\overline{d}d)|N>`$ at large quark mass and extrapolated this scale dependent quantity to the “physical” quark mass, which had to be determined in a separate calculation. The latest result with dynamical fermions, $`\sigma _N=18\pm 5`$ MeV , illustrates how difficult this procedure is. On the other hand, if one has a fit to $`M_N`$ as a function of $`m_\pi `$ which is consistent with chiral symmetry, one can evaluate $`\sigma _N`$ directly using Eq.(12). Using Eq.(10) with a sharp cut-off yields $`\sigma _N55`$ MeV, while a dipole form gives $`\sigma _N45`$ MeV . The residual model dependence can only be removed by more accurate lattice data at low $`m_\pi ^2`$. Nevertheless, the result $`\sigma _N(45,55)`$ MeV is in very good agreement with the data. In contrast, the simple cubic fit, with $`\gamma `$ inconsistent with chiral constraints, gives $`30`$ MeV. Until the experimental situation regarding $`\sigma _N`$ improves, it is not possible to draw definite conclusions regarding the strangeness content of the nucleon  from this analysis, but the fact that two-flavour QCD reproduces the current prefered value should certainly stimulate more work.

### 4.7 A Caution

A number of chiral constituent quark models are in common use, which involve a Hamiltonian with a pairwise, static one-pion-exchange force between quarks. It is important to realise that such models cannot be consistent with the general chiral constraints of QCD. By including only pairwise pion-exchange interactions, one is omitting Goldstone loops in which the pion is emitted and absorbed by the same quark . It is a simple exercise to convince oneself that all diagrams, including any number of Goldstone boson loops, gluon exchanges and so on, provided they can be cut on a single pion line, can be exactly written as $`_B\sigma _{NB}`$. Like $`\sigma _{NN}`$ and $`\sigma _{N\mathrm{\Delta }}`$, $`\sigma _{NB}`$ describes the process $`NB\pi N`$, with a renormalized $`\pi NB`$ vertex at each end of the pion loop.

The LNA behaviour of $`M_N`$ comes from $`B=N`$, because only this is degenerate with the initial nucleon. The NLNA behaviour comes from $`B=\mathrm{\Delta }`$, because this is the lowest mass baryon excitation available. $`\sigma _{NN}`$ and $`\sigma _{N\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ are the most important chiral corrections because they produce the LNA and NLNA behaviour. Heavier intermediate states will produce only relatively slow variations of $`M_N`$ with $`m_\pi `$ and can be summed phenomenologically into $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ in Eq.(9). This was the procedure advocated in the CBM  and we see that it is completely consistent with the chiral behaviour of QCD and chiral perturbation theory, in particular.

We stress that in order to ensure the correct chiral behaviour of hadron properties one must include all Goldstone loops, including those where it is emitted and absorbed by the same quark. While it is tempting to argue that the boson loop on the same quark could be included in the constituent quark mass, this is incorrect. Whether one gets LNA or NLNA behaviour depends on the environment in which the quark finds itself. For the nucleon case, if the intermediate quark plus its spectators has $`J=\frac{3}{2}`$ it is NLNA, while if the three quarks form a nucleon it is LNA. There is no alternative but to consistently evaluate Goldstone boson loops at the hadronic level.

### 4.8 Baryon Electromagnetic Properties

It is a completely general consequence of quantum mechanics that the long-range charge structure of the proton comes from its $`\pi ^+`$ cloud ($`pn\pi ^+`$), while for the neutron it comes from its $`\pi ^{}`$ cloud ($`np\pi ^{}`$). However it is not often realized that the LNA contribution to the nucleon charge radius goes like $`\mathrm{ln}m_\pi `$ and diverges as $`\overline{m}0`$ . This can never be described by a constituent quark model. Figure 3 shows the latest data from Mainz and Nikhef for the neutron electric form factor, in comparison with CBM calculations for a confinement radius between 0.9 and 1.0 fm. The long-range $`\pi ^{}`$ tail of the neutron plays a crucial role.

The situation for baryon magnetic moments is also very interesting. The LNA contribution in this case arises from the diagram where the photon couples to the pion loop. As this involves two pion propagators the expansion of the proton and neutron moments is:

$$\mu ^{p(n)}=\mu _0^{p(n)}\alpha m_\pi +𝒪(m_\pi ^2).$$
(13)
Here $`\mu _0^{p(n)}`$ is the value in the chiral limit and the linear term in $`m_\pi `$ is proportional to $`\overline{m}^{\frac{1}{2}}`$, a branch point at $`\overline{m}=0`$. The coefficient of the LNA term is $`\alpha =4.4\mu _N`$GeV-1. At the physical pion mass this LNA contribution is $`0.6\mu _N`$, which is almost a third of the neutron magnetic moment. No constituent quark model can or should get better agreement with data than this.

Just as for $`M_N`$, the chiral behaviour of $`\mu ^{p(n)}`$ is vital to a correct extrapolation of lattice data. One can obtain a very satisfactory fit to some rather old data, which happens to be the best available, using the simple Padé :

$$\mu ^{p(n)}=\frac{\mu _0^{p(n)}}{1\pm \frac{\alpha }{\mu _0^{p(n)}}m_\pi +\beta m_\pi ^2}$$
(14)
The data can only determine two parameters and Eq.(14) has just two free parameters while guaranteeing the correct LNA behaviour as $`m_\pi 0`$ and the correct behaviour of HQET at large $`m_\pi ^2`$. The extrapolated values of $`\mu ^p`$ and $`\mu ^n`$ at the physical pion mass, $`2.85\pm 0.22\mu _N`$ and $`1.90\pm 0.15\mu _N`$ are currently the best estimates from non-perturbative QCD . For more details of this fit and the application of similar ideas to other members of the nucleon octet, as well as the strangenesss magnetic moment of the nucleon, we refer to the presentation of D. Leinweber at this conference .

### 4.9 Deep-Inelastic Scattering

Although deep inelastic scattering has predominantly been used as a testing ground for perturbative QCD, the parton distributions contain direct information on the energy-momentum distribution of quarks and gluons inside the hadron. This is vital to our understanding of how hadron structure is realized in non-perturbative QCD. Of course, this information is viewed in a particular frame of reference, the infinite momentum frame. The problem of zero modes on in light-cone field theory is widely appreciated and the chiral behaviour of hadronic properties is usually believed to be part of that general problem. However, the LNA behaviour of these properties can give us some insight.

The observation that non-analytic behaviour in $`\overline{m}`$ can only come from Goldstone boson loops is just as true on the light-cone as anywhere else. Consider the process $`NN\pi N`$ in light-cone field theory. It is a straightforward exercise to show that the expression obtained using the Feynman rules for light-cone field theory does indeed have the LNA behaviour required by QCD. This seems natural, why bother to mention it? The point is that this LNA behaviour can only come from a $`\pi N`$ intermediate state. The subtle correlations in the pion which guarantee that $`m_\pi ^2\overline{m}`$, vanishing in the chiral limit, must be included. One will never obtain the LNA behaviour by including a few or even quite a lot of leading Fock components in the nucleon wavefunction.

This simple argument leads us to conclude that both $`N\pi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\pi `$ Fock components must be incorporated in the light-cone wave function of the nucleon if one is satisfy chiral constraints. One now famous consequence of this is the excess of $`\overline{d}`$ over $`\overline{u}`$ quarks in the proton, predicted  in 1983 and observed by NMC in 1990 . This measurement, and the important developments since then , have given us vital new information about the non-perturbative chiral structure of the nucleon. In this light it satisfying to see the remarkable result recently obtained by Melnitchouk et al. , which relates the LNA behaviour of the excess of $`\overline{d}`$ over $`\overline{u}`$ quarks to the LNA behaviour of the nucleon wave function renormalization constant:

$$_0^1𝑑x\left(\overline{d}(x)\overline{u}(x)\right)|_{LNA}m_\pi ^2\mathrm{ln}m_\pi .$$
(15)
## 5 Future Challenges in Spectroscopy

The calculation of the properties of highly excited baryons within lattice QCD is a very difficult challenge. However, for the lowest negative parity states new techniques have been developed which seem very promising . On the experimental side we can expect a tremendous wealth of new data from Jefferson Lab in the next few years. This should greatly clarify the situation regarding “missing states” and give us a much clearer picture concerning many other resonances.

One of the major theoretical challenges for the near future is the need to deal with the coupling of hadron resonances to various meson-baryon channels (open and closed). Not only do we have a problem that some states expected in the quark model are missing but there may be other states that should not be considered quark states at all. A famous example is the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$, which almost certainly results from the extremely strong attraction in the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\pi `$ s-wave, coupled to $`\overline{K}N`$ . Another candidate which has attracted a great deal of theoretical attention is the Roper. The most recent study by the Jülich group, including the effect of coupled $`\pi N,\pi \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\sigma N`$ channels, strongly suggests that the Roper is not a quark model state . This would certainly resolve a number of problems with its low mass.

While these interpretations of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(1405)`$ and the Roper seem to be correct, there is a real danger in an uncontrolled coupled channels approach to such problems. As illustrated by the classic case of the Chew-Low model of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$, it is always possible to generate a resonance through multiple scattering. On the other hand, we know that in the absence of open channels QCD predicts the existence of hadrons. It is essential in unravelling the nature of observed resonance states that one must use a consistent model of the internal structure of the hadrons involved in order to calculate the appropriate coupling to relevant meson-baryon channels. The classic CBM work on the $`\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$ showed that in such an approach it was clear that it is primarily a three-quark state, not the result of strong pion-nucleon rescattering. The Jülich group finds a similar result for the $`S_{11}(1535)`$ – even though its coupling to $`\eta N`$ is very strong. Finally, we note that while the examples quoted have been baryon resonances, exactly the same questions arise for mesons . This is a field of study which is just beginning in earnest.

## 6 Conclusion

It is clear that there have been some outstanding developments in our understanding of hadron structure in terms of QCD over the last 25 years. Yet the next 10 promise much more. We can expect data on hadron electroweak form factors of increasing precision over a vastly wider range of kinematic variables. We can also expect an entirely new range of observables, including for the nucleon: virtual Compton scattering (VCS), deeply VCS, spin-dependent Compton scattering, transition form factors to (and between) new baryon resonances, determinations of $`G_E^s`$ and $`G_M^s`$, the nucleon anapole moment and semi-inclusive deep-inelastic scattering data.

On the theoretical side there will be rapid progress in lattice QCD, with improved actions and faster computers making it possible to include dynamical quarks with masses approaching the physical region. Improved interaction between phenomenology and lattice simulations will lead to ever more reliable chiral extrapolations of the physical properties of hadrons. There will also be serious and consistent studies of the effects of channel coupling, both for regular meson and baryon resonances but also for hybrids and glueballs. Finally, we can expect a great deal more productive feedback between the results of QCD inspired models and lattice simulations.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is a pleasure to acknowledge the collaboration and helpful discussions with many staff, students and visitors at the CSSM who have contributed to my understanding of the problems discussed here, especially C. Boros, G. Krein, D. Leinweber, D. Lu, W. Melnitchouk, F. Steffens, K. Tsushima, A. Williams and S. Wright. This work was supported by the Australian Research Council and the University of Adelaide.