text:
# Microscopic structure of fundamental excitations in 𝑁=𝑍 nuclei

\[

## Abstract

Excitation energies of the $`T`$=1 states in even-even as well as $`T`$=0 and $`T`$=1 states in odd-odd $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei are calculated within the mean-field approach. It is shown that the underlying structure of these states can be determined in a consistent manner only when both isoscalar and isovector pairing collectivity as well as isospin projection, treated within the iso-cranking approximation, are taken into account. In particular, in odd-odd $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei, the interplay between quasiparticle excitations (relevant for the case of $`T`$=0 states) and iso-rotations (relevant for the case of $`T`$=1 states) explains the near-degeneracy of these fundamental excitations.

\]

It is well known that pairing properties of finite Fermi systems are number-parity dependent. This is particularly well documented in atomic nuclei which exhibit phenomena like odd-even mass staggering or odd-even staggering of the moments of inertia. These phenomena origin from simple phase-space quenching due to the odd (quasi)particle known as the blocking effect. Within the standard BCS theory of superconductivity the blocking effect can be naturally accounted for by assuming the ground state of the odd system to be a one-quasiparticle (qp) \[or two-quasiparticle (2qp) in odd-odd (o–o) nuclei\] excitation on top of the even-even vacuum, $`\alpha ^{}|vac`$. In fact, the simplicity and consistency of the BCS treatment of even and odd nuclei was of paramount importance to establish the theory of superconductivity in atomic nuclei .

The classical BCS theory requires to be extended only in the closest vicinity of the $`N`$=$`Z`$ line. In these nuclei, apart from the isovector pairing mode, also isoscalar neutron-proton Cooper pairs coupled to non-zero angular momentum can be formed. However, the empirical fingerprints of this pairing phase are not very clear. The problem is rather complex, because it requires a detailed understanding of both pairing phenomena and the nuclear symmetry energy. An invaluable source of information allowing to disentangle these effects, are the isobaric excitations in $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei as already discussed in . Unfortunately, most of these studies were either purely phenomenological or based on, in our opinion, inconsistent models. In this letter, we argue that the proper understanding of the isobaric excitations can be obtained only on a microscopic level. It requires that both isoscalar and isovector pairing as well as isospin projection \[at least approximate\] are taken into account. Moreover, within such a model, the standard BCS scheme of elementary excitations does not apply any longer. We provide the necessary extensions of the BCS theory which allow for a simultaneous description of (i) the mass-excess in $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei, (ii) isospin $`T`$=1 excitations in even-even (e–e) $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei \[theory of $`T`$=2 states in e–e nuclei was given in our previous letter \], and (iii) $`T`$=0 and $`T`$=1 states in o–o nuclei.

We begin with the description of the $`T`$=1 states in e–e nuclei. Similar to our letter  we start with a single-particle (sp) model, $`\widehat{H}^\omega =\widehat{H}_{sp}\mathrm{}\omega \widehat{t}_x`$, where $`\widehat{H}_{sp}`$ generates (for a sake of simplicity) an equidistant and iso-symmetric i.e. four-fold degenerate spectrum $`e_i=i\delta e`$. For non-zero frequency each level splits into a pair of upsloping ($`|`$) and downsloping ($`|+`$) routhians, carrying alignment $`t_x=1/2`$. The sp routhians cross at the frequencies: $`\mathrm{}\omega _c^{(n)}=(2n1)\delta e`$ where $`n=1,2,3\mathrm{}`$. As shown in  the reoccupation process which takes place at each level crossing \[$`\omega _c^{(n)}`$\] conserves the iso-signature symmetry. In other words, cranking the lowest sp configuration (vacuum) gives only states of even isospin. Hence, states of odd isospin are obtained by promoting one particle from the $`|`$ state to the lowest $`|+`$ state as depicted in Fig. 1. The lowest odd-T branch of the iso-rotational band is obtained by cranking this particle-hole (p-h) excited state. The excitation energy and initial alignment of this p-h state are $`\delta e`$ and $`T_x`$=1, respectively. The p-h excitation modifies the iso-rotational spectrum in the following manner: First of all it blocks the level crossing at $`\mathrm{}\omega =\delta e`$. The allowed crossings appear at frequencies $`\mathrm{}\omega _c^{(n)}=2n\delta e`$ \[$`n`$=1,2,3…\]. At each level crossing the isospin changes by $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_x`$=2 giving rise to an odd-T iso-rotational band. The total excitation energy of the band follows

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E=\frac{1}{2}\delta e+\frac{1}{2}\delta eT_x^2$$
(1)
dependence. The formula (1) is similar to the one obtained previously  for the states of even isospin. Indeed, the moment of inertia (MoI) of the even-T iso-rotational band \[built on the vacuum\] comes out identical to the MoI of the odd-T band \[built on the lowest p-h excitation\]. However, the odd-T band is shifted in energy by $`\delta e`$/2 due to the required p-h excitation. Although the sp model is oversimplified, it reveals the nature of odd- and even-T states in e–e nuclei: Due to iso-signature symmetry, odd-T states are based on an excited p-h configuration and cannot be reached by iso-cranking the vacuum configuration to an odd-Tx value. For a realistic model including pairing correlations, this corresponds to the lowest two-quasiparticle (2qp) state.

We now proceed to investigate how the excitation scheme is modified in the presence of pairing correlations. Our hamiltonian is based on the deformed single particle potential of Woods-Saxon (WS) type . The two-body correlations contain both isovector and isoscalar seniority-type pairing:

$$\widehat{H}^\omega =\widehat{h}_{WS}+G_{T=1}\widehat{P}_1^{}\widehat{P}_1+G_{T=0}\widehat{P}_0^{}\widehat{P}_0\mathrm{}\omega \widehat{t}_x$$
(2)
where $`\widehat{P}_1^{}`$ and $`\widehat{P}_0^{}`$ create isovector and isoscalar pairs, respectively. The Hamiltonian (2) is solved using the Lipkin-Nogami method. The model is very similar to the one described in detail in Ref. . However, different to Ref.  we now employ the most general Bogolyubov transformation. It allows us to fully explore the isoscalar pairing channel without any symmetry induced restrictions i.e. to include simultaneously $`𝜶𝜶`$ and $`𝜶\stackrel{\mathbf{~}}{𝜶}`$ isoscalar pairs. It is important to stress that the model is identical the one used in Ref.  to compute $`T`$=2 excitations in e–e nuclei. Like before, we set the deformation to $`\beta _2=0.05`$. In the applications to e–e nuclei we use the same values of $`x^{T=0}=G_{T=0}/G_{T=1}`$ and cut-off parameters, while for the o–o ($`N`$=$`Z`$=$`A`$/2) cases the cut-off parameters and $`x^{T=0}`$ values deduced for the e–e $`N`$=$`Z`$=$`A`$/2–1 neighbour were used consequently. Excitation energies as discussed in this work are not affected by the kind of $`T`$=0 pairing used in the calculations ($`𝜶\stackrel{\mathbf{~}}{𝜶}`$, $`𝜶𝜶`$ or mixed phases). In the following we restrict the calculations to ($`𝜶\stackrel{\mathbf{~}}{𝜶}`$ pairing in the $`T`$=0 channel, which in the presence of standard cranking corresponds to states of low angular momentum .

In our previous letter we have shown that the cranked ground state configuration $`|vac`$ with $`T_x`$=$`\sqrt{6}`$ \[$`T_x`$=$`\sqrt{T(T+1)}`$\] yields surprisingly accurate predictions for $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{T=2}`$. However, as mentioned above we cannot repeat this procedure for the $`T`$=1 states and determine the frequency $`\mathrm{}\omega `$ for the $`|vac`$ so that $`T_x`$=$`\sqrt{2}`$. This would violate the iso-signature symmetry. The proper trial wave function corresponds to the lowest elementary excitation, i.e. to 2qp, $`\widehat{\alpha }_1^{}\widehat{\alpha }_2^{}|vac`$, excitation. Hence, we do proceed as follow: (i) At each iteration step we perform the standard Hartree-Fock-Bogolyubov (HFB) transformation

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\text{U}^{(k)}\\ \text{V}^{(k)}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\text{V}^{(k)}\\ \text{U}^{(k)}\end{array}\right)$$
(3)
for the two lowest quasiparticle states $`k`$=1,2. Moreover (ii) we impose a certain, very small, spatial cranking frequency $`\mathrm{}\omega _s0.01`$ MeV to remove the degeneracies in the qp spectrum. This does not influence the excitation energy, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{T=1}`$, and is further justified because the $`T`$=1 state have, in general, $`I0`$. Finally, (iii) since at the iso-frequency zero the alignment $`2qp|\widehat{t}_x|2qp_{\omega =0}`$=0, we determine the cranking frequency $`\mathrm{}\omega `$ so that our solution satisfies the condition of $`T_x`$=$`1`$.

The results of our calculations are shown in Fig. 2. The agreement between the data is more than satisfactory given the simplicity of our model. Moreover, because all parameters follow exactly those used for the calculations of the $`T`$=2 states  we have a consistent scheme that accounts simultaneously for the mass excess (the Wigner energy), the $`T`$=1, and $`T`$=2 states in e–e $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei.

Isoscalar pairing plays a crucial and, interestingly, different role regarding the nature of these states. Although the $`T`$=2 states are predicted to be purely isovector paired, isoscalar correlations are vital in restoring the correct inertia parameter  and, hence, the excitation energy. In contrast, the $`T`$=1 states are calculated to have only isoscalar pairing, see Fig. 3b. Already the 2qp excitation results in strongly reduced isovector pairing. With increasing iso-cranking frequency the iso-alignment of the system increases smoothly, and the weak isovector pairing becomes quenched, see Fig. 3. Apparently, by decreasing isovector pairing the systems gains alignment and, in turn, also energy. This process counterbalance the energy loss due to the disappearance of the isovector pairing. Once the nucleus reaches the alignment corresponding to $`T_x`$=1 it becomes trapped. This accounts for the cranking condition of $`T_x`$=1, since the 2qp configuration decouples from the core and becomes fully aligned. There is no collective rotation of the core. This state does not change until very high iso-frequencies where isoscalar pairing is destroyed and either the sp state is reached or isovector pairing sets in again. For example, for 44Ti depicted in Fig. 3, the nucleus is trapped at $`\mathrm{}\omega `$1.5MeV and stays there until $`\mathrm{}\omega `$5.8MeV. An interesting consequence emerges from the pairing properties of this state. Due to isospin symmetry, the o–o $`T_z`$=$`\pm `$1 states are also expected to have a predominantly isoscalar pairing field. Therefore, transfer reactions from odd-odd $`T_z`$=$`\pm `$1 to the $`T_z`$=0,$`T`$=1 state and vice versa may be sensitive to isoscalar pairing correlations.

Let us finally turn to the spectrum of o–o $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei. There, the ground state is determined by the competition between the $`T`$=1 and $`T`$=0 states, respectively. Though the lowest $`T`$=0 and $`T`$=1 states are nearly degenerate, the $`T`$=0 states are favored in lighter nuclei (below $`f_{7/2}`$ sub-shell) whereas the $`T`$=1 states become the ground state in heavier nuclei. There are two exceptions from this rule, namely 34Cl and 58Cu . Several authors already pointed out that the structure of the ground state of o–o $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei reflects the delicate balance between the symmetry energy and pairing correlations, and that the energy difference may constitute a sensitive probe for the role of isovector and isoscalar pairing correlations . The works of  dealt mainly with data analysis and did not attempt to provide a microscopic explanation. The considerations of Ref.  are based on the mean-field model with isovector pairing only and the ad hoc assumption that the symmetry energy corresponds to $`E_{sym}T(T+1)`$ although it is known that microscopic mean-field models yield $`E_{sym}(NZ)^2T^2`$.

To better understand the situation in $`N`$=$`Z`$ o–o nuclei let us come back for a while to the extreme sp picture. In this model two valence nucleons can form either an isovector, $`T=1`$, pair ($`|+|+`$) giving rise to iso-aligned ground state configuration or an isoscalar pair ($`||+`$) forming a $`T`$=0 p-h excitation. The energy of both states is completely degenerate. Again, pairing correlations will modify this simple picture.

Within the standard mean-field theory for pairing correlations (HFB) the ground states of o–o $`NZ`$ nuclei are described as 2qp excitation of the e–e vacuum, $`\widehat{\alpha }_1^{}\widehat{\alpha }_2^{}|vac`$. These ground states are all the minimal isospin states $`T=|T_z|=|NZ|/2`$. Hence, for reason of consistency, all states of minimal isospin in o–o nuclei, including the $`T`$=0 states in $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei, have to be treated as 2qp states. Therefore, we calculate the $`T`$=0 ground state of the o–o $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei by blocking the lowest 2qp states self-consistently, similarly to the case of e–e $`T`$=1 states. However, no iso-cranking is necessary, since $`T`$=0.

In contrast, due to the isospin symmetry, the $`T`$=1 state of the o–o $`N`$=$`Z`$ nucleus can be regarded as a linear combination of the isobaric analogue states i.e. the ($`N`$+1,$`Z`$–1) and ($`N`$–1,$`Z`$+1) e–e neighbours. Hence, it represents the vacuum of an e–e nucleus, however excited in isospace. Since in this case we project on good $`T_z`$=0, the e–e vacuum need to be iso-cranked to yield the correct value of $`T_x=\sqrt{2}`$. The difference between the theoretical approach to calculate $`T`$=0 and $`T`$=1 states in o–o nuclei is shown schematically in the inset of Fig. 4, which elucidates the role played by blocking and iso-cranking, respectively. The difference in structure between these states is easy to understand qualitatively. Indeed, since no blocking but only iso-cranking is applied for $`T`$=1 states, isovector pairing is not reduced at all. However, isoscalar pairing is suppressed due to the isospin anti-pairing effect . In contrast, the $`T`$=0 state experience strongly reduced pairing correlations due to the blocking effect. Note, that both isoscalar and isovector correlations are reduced as compared to the e–e neighbour. Hence, the $`T`$=0 and $`T`$=1 states in o–o and e–e $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei are of different nature, since they are based on two different fundamental excitations. It is therefore straightforward to understand the basic differences in the excitation energy pattern of e–e and o–o nuclei. In e–e nuclei, we need to consider both quasi-particle excitations and isospin cranking for the $`T`$=1 excitation. Both are costly in energy and hence the excitation energy is rather high. In o–o nuclei, we simply deal with the competition between iso-cranking ($`T`$=1) and 2qp excitation ($`T`$=0). Energetically, to first approximation, these effects are very similar.

To get a quantitative estimate on the energy difference of the $`T`$=0 and $`T`$=1 states $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=\mathrm{\Delta }E_{T=1}\mathrm{\Delta }E_{T=0}`$ in o–o nuclei, we performed a set of calculations following the rules sketched above. The results are presented in Fig. 4. As mentioned above, to first order these two basically different states are almost degenerate in experiment ($``$). Similar result are indeed obtained in our calculations ($``$). This result is particularly interesting because it was claimed previously, that this degeneracy is a proof of lacking $`T`$=0 pairing correlations . Evidently, these claims were based upon a poor understanding of the underlying structure of the elementary excitations allowed in the presence of proton-neutron pairing correlations.

Note, that in our calculations we obtain not only the near-degeneracy but also an inversion of the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ which, in agreement with experiment, takes place somewhere around the $`f_{7/2}`$ sub-shell. The inversion reflects basically the different mass dependence of the symmetry energy and the pairing correlations. Since the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{T=1}`$ is governed by the symmetry energy, it will decrease with mass as $`1/A`$. On the other hand, the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{T=0}`$ is governed by pairing properties, i.e. depends on the size of the effective pairing gap including both $`T`$=0 and $`T`$=1 pairing correlations. Apparently, the pairing correlations do not fall off with mass as rapidly as $`1/A`$ giving rise to the inversion.

In summary, we have presented a consistent microscopic explanation of the pairing phenomena in o–o and e–e $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei based on the mean-field approximation. Our model includes, in a self-consistent manner, both isoscalar and isovector pairing correlations, and takes into account projection onto good particle-number \[within the so called Lipkin-Nogami approximation \], and isospin \[within isospin cranking formalism \]. In e–e $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei the $`T`$=1 excitation is described as an iso-cranked 2qp configuration. According to the model, with increasing iso-frequency, the valence pair decouples from the fully isoscalar-paired core and aligns along the x-axis in isospace forming a trap at iso-alignment $`T_x=1`$. In o–o $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei the $`T`$=1 excitation is described by means of the iso-cranked o–o ’false vacuum’ with $`T_x=\sqrt{2}`$. Hence, this state represents a mixture of e–e neighbours ($`Z`$–1,$`N`$+1 and $`Z`$+1,$`N`$–1) in accordance with isospin symmetry. The $`T`$=0 excitations in o–o $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei, on the other hand, are treated as 2qp excitations on top of the o–o ’false vacuum’ similar to the standard self-consistent BCS treatment of all o–o $`NZ`$ nuclei. The model simultaneously account for the Wigner energy the excitation energies of the $`T`$=1 and $`T`$=2 states in e–e nuclei, the near-degeneracy as well as inversion of $`T`$=0 and $`T`$=1 states in o–o $`N`$=$`Z`$ nuclei.

This work was supported by the Göran Gustafsson Foundation, the Swedish Natural Science Research council (NFR), and the Polish Committee for Scientific Research (KBN) under Contract No. 2 P03B 040 14.


format: text

text:
# References

The method of direct expansions of Feynman integrals

S.A. Larin

Institut für Theoretische Teilchenphysik, Universität Karlsruhe,

D-76128 Karlsruhe, Germany

and

Institute for Nuclear Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences,

60th October Anniversary Prospect 7a, Moscow 117312, Russia

## Abstract

The universal method of expansion of integrals is suggested. It allows in particular to derive the threshold expansion of Feynman integrals.

During the last two decades the efficient techniques were developed - for expansions of Feynman integrals in external parameters. These techniques allow to perform practical analytic calculations in quantum field theory when exact integrations are not possible.

Recently the prescription was suggested  for expansions of Feynman integrals near thresholds but its consistent derivation is missing, see also .

In the present paper we suggest the universal method of expansion of integrals – ’the method of direct expansions’. In particular it allows to derive consistently the threshold expansion.

To regularize integrals we will use dimensional regularization  for convenience (but the method is regularization independent). The dimension of the momentum space is $`D=42ϵ`$ where $`ϵ`$ is the parameter defining the deviation of the dimension from its physical value 4.

To demonstrate the essence of the method of direct expansions we begin with the following simple integral depending on some external parameter $`t`$

$$I_1_0^1\frac{dx}{(x+t)^{1+ϵ}}=\frac{1}{ϵ}\frac{1}{t^ϵ}\frac{1}{ϵ}\frac{1}{(1+t)^ϵ},$$
(1)
where $`ϵ`$ is the parameter of dimensional regularization.

We want to expand this integral in small $`t`$ before the integration. Let us directly expand the integrand in small $`t`$

$$_0^1𝑑x\left[\frac{1}{x^{1+ϵ}}(1+ϵ)\frac{1}{x^{2+ϵ}}t+(1+ϵ)(2+ϵ)\frac{1}{x^{3+ϵ}}\frac{t^2}{2}+O(t^3)\right]=$$
(2)
$$\frac{1}{ϵ}+t(1+ϵ)\frac{t^2}{2}+O(t^3).$$

In the absence of dimensional regularization, i.e. for $`ϵ=0`$, this expansion would produce non-integrable singularities at $`x=0`$. But dimensional regularization makes these singularities integrable and this direct expansion correctly reproduces the small $`t`$ expansion of the exact result in the right hand side of eq.(1). Only the term $`\frac{1}{ϵ}\frac{1}{t^ϵ}`$ is invisible for the small $`t`$ expansion (i.e. its expansion gives zero in any order) due to the basic property of dimensional regularization

$$\frac{1}{t^{ϵ+n}}=0fort=0ort=\mathrm{},nϵ,$$
(3)
where $`n`$ can be an arbitrary number.

One can say that the term $`\frac{1}{ϵ}\frac{1}{t^ϵ}`$ is a non-perturbative term for the small $`t`$ expansion. Thus the expansion (2) is correct but not complete, since it has the non-perturbative term which can be not small for small $`t`$, e.g. its expansion in $`ϵ`$ gives $`ln(t)`$.

Let us now expand the integral $`I_1`$ in large $`t`$. We again directly expand the integrand. This means that one factorizes the factor $`\frac{1}{t^{1+ϵ}}`$ and then expands the integrand in a Taylor series in $`1/t`$ or, in other words, one expands the integrand in small $`x`$

$$_0^1𝑑x\left[\frac{1}{t^{1+ϵ}}(1+ϵ)\frac{1}{t^{2+ϵ}}x+(1+ϵ)(2+ϵ)\frac{1}{t^{3+ϵ}}\frac{x^2}{2}+O(x^3)\right]=$$
(4)
$$\frac{1}{t^{1+ϵ}}(1+ϵ)\frac{1}{2t^{2+ϵ}}+(1+ϵ)(2+ϵ)\frac{1}{6t^{3+ϵ}}+O\left(\frac{1}{t^{4+ϵ}}\right).$$

Again this expansion correctly reproduces the expansion in large $`t`$ of the exact result in the r.h.s. of (1). The expansion in large $`t`$ for the exact result means that one first factorizes the non-perturbative factor $`\frac{1}{t^ϵ}`$ and then expand the rest in the Taylor series in $`1/t`$. The expansion (4) is complete, i.e. there are no non-perturbative terms for it. This is because the terms of this expansion are integrable even for $`ϵ=0`$, i.e. in the absence of dimensional regularization.

Let us generalize the above considerations. This simple example reflects the principal property of expansions of integrals: an expansion of a given integrand produces a correct result if all terms of this expansion are integrable. (For the integral $`I_1`$ it is dimensional regularization which makes all terms of expansions integrable. For some integrals it can happen with the help of other regularizations, e.g. analytic regularization.) A correct result means that it correctly reproduces a corresponding part of an exact result for a given integral. But the essential point is that a correct result does not always mean a complete result. There can be non-perturbative terms in an exact result which are invisible for some expansions, i.e. expansions of these terms give zero in any order. (In the above example it was the term $`1/t^ϵ`$ which was invisible in any order of the expansion in small $`t`$.) To get a complete expansion of a given integral one should construct a complete set of direct expansions of an integrand to reproduce all necessary terms.

To see how the method works practically let us apply it to a Feynman integral. We will consider the following two loop propagator Feynman integral with an external momentum $`q`$ and a mass $`M`$

$$I_2\frac{d^Dkd^Dl}{(kq)^2k^2[(kl)^2M^2](ql)^2l^2},$$
(5)
where integrations over loop momenta $`k`$ and $`l`$ are performed in $`D`$-dimensions. Here and below in the paper we omit the “casual” $`i0`$ in propagators for brevity. We will expand this integral in large $`M`$, i.e. in small $`q^2/M^2`$.

Let us first obtain the part of the complete expansion proportional to $`1/(q^2)^{2ϵ}`$. Then we will construct also the direct expansions for the remaining parts proportional to the factors $`1/(M^2q^2)^ϵ`$ and $`1/(M^2)^{2ϵ}`$ allowed by power counting of non-integer dimensions due to non-zero $`ϵ`$. One should construct direct expansions for all parts with different non-integer dimensions of external parameters. This is the essence of the method.

To get the part proportional to $`1/(q^2)^{2ϵ}`$ we expand the integrand directly in large $`M`$. Or, in other words, we expand the massive propagator in the Taylor series in momenta $`k`$ and $`l`$

$$T_{k,l}\left[\frac{1}{(kl)^2M^2}\right]=\frac{1}{M^2}\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(kl)^{2j}}{M^{2j}}.$$
(6)
Then we get

$$I_2^{(1)}=d^Dkd^Dl\frac{1}{(kq)^2k^2(ql)^2l^2}T_{k,l}\left[\frac{1}{(kl)^2M^2}\right].$$
(7)
This direct expansion generates ultraviolet divergences, but dimensional regularization makes them integrable. Hence this is the correct expansion, i.e. it reproduces the corresponding expansion of the exact result in large $`M`$ (one first factorizes $`1/M^2`$ in the exact result and then expands the rest in small $`q^2/M^2`$). By power counting of the non-integer dimensions due to non-zero $`ϵ`$ one finds that the integrals in (7) are indeed proportional to $`1/(q^2)^{2ϵ}`$ since they depend only on one external parameter $`q`$.

The complete expansion for the original integral $`I_2`$ contains also terms invisible for the direct expansion (7). In particular the part proportional to $`1/(M^2)^ϵ`$ is invisible in this expansion because of the basic property of dimensional regularization (3) which in this concrete case reads $`1/(M^2)^{ϵ+n}=0`$ for $`M=\mathrm{}`$. To get this part one can make the substitution $`k^\mu MK^\mu `$ in the original integral $`I_2`$ where $`K^\mu `$ is some new momentum. Then the invisible for the large $`M`$ expansion factor $`1/(M^2)^ϵ`$ is explicitly factorized by the integration measure $`d^Dk=M^Dd^DK`$ and the integral takes the form

$$I_2=\frac{M^D}{(M^2)^3}\frac{d^DKd^Dl}{(Kq/M)^2K^2[(Kl/M)^21](ql)^2l^2}.$$
(8)
In this expression one can directly expand the integrand in large $`M`$ getting the necessary contribution proportional to $`1/(M^2)^ϵ`$. (Then one can return to old variables making the substitution $`K^\mu =k^\mu /M`$.) One can see that the same direct expansion can be obtained from the original integral (5) by expanding the propagators carrying the momentum $`k`$ in the Taylor series in momenta $`q`$ and $`l`$. Thus one gets the second contribution

$$I_2^{(2)}=d^Dkd^Dl\frac{1}{k^2(ql)^2l^2}T_q\left[\frac{1}{(kq)^2}\right]T_l\left[\frac{1}{[(kl)^2M^2]}\right],$$
(9)
where $`T_q`$ and $`T_l`$ are the operators generating the Taylor series in $`q`$ and $`l`$ correspondingly. Here the integrals over $`k`$ and $`l`$ factorize. The integrals over $`k`$ depend only on one external parameter $`M`$ and are proportional to $`1/(M^2)^ϵ`$. The integrals over $`l`$ are proportional to $`1/(q^2)^ϵ`$. Thus we get the desired contribution proportional to $`1/(M^2q^2)^ϵ`$. One should also take into account that there is a symmetrical contribution of this type. It can be obtained from the original integral (5) if one expands the propagators carrying the momentum $`l`$ in the Taylor series in $`q`$ and $`k`$. So the contribution $`I_2^{(2)}`$ comes with the factor 2 to the complete expansion.

One more way to get the same contribution $`I_2^{(2)}`$ is via the substitutions $`q^\mu =\lambda Q^\mu `$ and $`k^\mu =\lambda K^\mu `$, where $`\lambda `$ is an arbitrary parameter. Hence the factor $`1/\lambda ^{2ϵ}`$ is explicitely factorized by the integration measure $`d^Dk=\lambda ^Dd^DK`$. Then one can directly expand the integrand in $`\lambda `$ and see that remaining integrals are proportional to the necessary factor $`1/(\lambda Q)^{2ϵ}`$. Substitutions of this type can be useful in expansions of more complicated integrals.

We have obtained two contributions (7) and (9) to the complete expansion of $`I_2`$. But the part proportional to $`1/(M^2)^{2ϵ}`$ is still invisible in these equations. To get this part let us expand the integrand of the original integral (5) directly in the Taylor series in the external momentum q. Then we get the third contribution

$$I_2^{(3)}=\frac{d^Dkd^Dl}{k^2[(kl)^2M^2]l^2}T_q\left[\frac{1}{(kq)^2(ql)^2}\right].$$
(10)
It is clear from power counting of non-integer dimensions due to non-zero $`ϵ`$ that integrals in the above equation are proportional to the desired factor $`1/(M^2)^{2ϵ}`$ since they depend only on one external parameter $`M`$.

Summing three contributions (7), (9) and (10) we get the resulting expansion

$$I_2=d^Dkd^Dl\frac{1}{(kq)^2k^2(ql)^2l^2}T_{k,l}\left[\frac{1}{(kl)^2M^2}\right]+$$
(11)
$$2d^Dkd^Dl\frac{1}{k^2(ql)^2l^2}T_q\left[\frac{1}{(kq)^2}\right]T_l\left[\frac{1}{[(kl)^2M^2]}\right]+$$

$$\frac{d^Dkd^Dl}{k^2[(kl)^2M^2]l^2}T_q\left[\frac{1}{(kq)^2(ql)^2}\right].$$

One can ask if there are other non-perturbative terms in the complete expansion for the original integral $`I_2`$ which are invisible in the above direct expansions, e.g. terms proportional to $`(q^2)^ϵ/(M^2)^{3ϵ}`$. Such non-minimal terms (i.e. terms containing factors $`1/(M^2)^{lϵ}`$ or $`1/(q^2)^{lϵ}`$ where $`l`$ is larger then the number of loops of the integral) could be present by power counting. But if one tries to construct a direct expansion of $`I_2`$ which would generate such terms then the result is zero, which means that such terms are absent. In the case of the threshold expansion the terms of this non-minimal type appear for two loop propagator diagrams.

The result (11) agrees with the prescription for the large-mass expansion of Feynman integrals explicitely formulated in ,. The essential point of the present paper is the compact derivation of this expansion.

We will apply now the method to the case of the threshold expansion of Feynman integrals. Let us consider a scalar one loop vertex integral containing two massive propagators with a mass $`m`$ and one massless propagator. This integral appears e.g. in the form factor for the decay of the virtual photon into a quark-antiquark pair $`\gamma ^{}(q)\overline{Q}(p_1)Q(p_2)`$ with momenta $`p_1^2=p_2^2=m^2`$, $`q=p_1+p_2`$. One defines also the relative momentum $`p=(p_1p_2)/2`$ with $`pq=0`$. The threshold region is characterized by

$$ym^2\frac{q^2}{4}=p^2,|y|q^2$$
(12)
and one considers the expansion in small $`y`$, i.e. in small $`y/q^2`$. The corresponding integral is

$$I_3\frac{d^Dk}{[(k+q/2)^2m^2][(kq/2)^2m^2](kp)^2}=$$
(13)
$$\frac{d^Dk}{(k^2+qky)(k^2qky)(kp)^2}.$$

The expansion for this integral was obtained in  but its consistent derivation was missing, see also .

Below we give the derivation of this expansion using the method. One should again construct direct expansions for all possible terms with different non-integer dimensions of external parameters. Let us first get the part proportional to $`1/(q^2)^ϵ`$. We directly expand the integrand in the Taylor series in $`y`$ and $`p`$. All terms are integrable due to dimensional regularization and one correctly reproduces the expansion of the exact result for the integral $`I_3`$ in small $`y`$. The leading term of this expansion is

$$I_3^{(1)}=\frac{d^Dk}{(k^2+qk)(k^2qk)k^2}=i\pi ^{D/2}\left(\frac{4}{q^2}\right)^{1+ϵ}\frac{1}{2ϵ}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+ϵ)}{1+2ϵ}.$$
(14)
One can also calculate the higher order terms in $`y`$ using e.g. Feynman parameters.

But one can see by power counting that the complete result can contain also the part proportional to $`1/y^ϵ`$. It is invisible for the small $`y`$ expansion due to the basic property of dimensional regularization (3) which now reads $`1/y^{ϵ+n}=0`$ for $`y=0`$. To get this part we should construct the direct expansion in large $`q`$. For this purpose it is convenient to go to the frame $`q=(q_0,\stackrel{}{0}),p=(0,\stackrel{}{p})`$. Then the integral is

$$I_3=\frac{d^Dk}{(k^2+q_0k_0y)(k^2q_0k_0y)(kp)^2}.$$
(15)
Let us make the substitution $`q_0k_0r_0`$. The integral takes the form

$$I_3=\frac{1}{q_0}\frac{dr_0d^{D1}\stackrel{}{k}}{(\frac{r_0^2}{q_0^2}\stackrel{}{k}^2+r_0y)(\frac{r_0^2}{q_0^2}\stackrel{}{k}^2r_0y)(\frac{r_0^2}{q_0^2}(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{p})^2)}.$$
(16)
We can now expand the integrand directly in large $`q_0`$, i.e. in small $`r_0^2/q_0^2`$. The resulting integrals depend only on one external parameter $`y`$ producing thus the necessary part proportional to $`1/y^ϵ`$. The leading term of this expansion reads

$$I_3^{(2)}=\frac{1}{q_0}\frac{dr_0d^{D1}\stackrel{}{k}}{(\stackrel{}{k}^2+r_0y)(\stackrel{}{k}^2r_0y)((\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{p})^2)}=$$
(17)
$$i\pi ^{D/2}\frac{1}{y^{ϵ+1/2}\sqrt{q^2}}\frac{\sqrt{\pi }\mathrm{\Gamma }(ϵ+1/2)}{2ϵ}.$$

Note that higher order terms in the expansion in large $`q_0`$ give zero since positive powers of $`r_0^2`$ produce (after integrations over $`r_0`$) massless tadpoles which are zero in dimensional regularization.

The exact result for the integral $`I_3`$ can be obtained by using e.g. Feynman parameters. Then one can see that the sum of the direct expansions (14) and (17) indeed reproduces the expansion of the exact result

$$\frac{1}{i\pi ^{D/2}}I_3=\frac{1}{y^{1+ϵ}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(ϵ)}{2}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(\frac{1}{2},1+ϵ,\frac{3}{2};\frac{q^2}{4y})=$$
(18)
$$\left(\frac{4}{q^2}\right)^{1+ϵ}\frac{1}{2ϵ}\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+ϵ+j)}{1+2ϵ+2j}\frac{1}{j!}\left(\frac{4y}{q^2}\right)^j+\frac{1}{y^{ϵ+1/2}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{q^2}}\frac{\sqrt{\pi }\mathrm{\Gamma }(ϵ+1/2)}{2ϵ}.$$

In this way one obtains the threshold expansion by the method of direct expansions.

The author is grateful to the collaborators of the Institute for theoretical particle physics of the University of Karlsruhe, where the part of this work was done, for hospitality. The author gratefully acknowledges the support by Volkswagen Foundation under contract No. I/73611.


text:
# Bootstrap quark model and spectra masses, electromagnetic properties of low-lying hadrons

## 1 Introduction

The quark phenomenology is based on the hypothesis of the quasinuclear hadron structure: the hadron consists of two (meson) or three (baryon) spatially separated dressed quarks like the nucleus consists of nucleons. A dressed quark of the quasinuclear model should be a quark-gluon cluster consisting of the valence quark, sea quarks and anti-quarks. The small size of the dressed quark may be connected with the small range of gluon interaction. One should try to describe soft processes operating with dressed quarks as quasi-particles. The project is devoted to the construction of low-energy quark scattering amplitudes. The iteration bootstrap procedure includes two types of point-like input interactions, namely the four-fermion interaction with quantum numbers of the gluon and four-fermion interaction induced by instantons (the exchange of white states with $`J^P=0^\pm `$). Calculations performed in the framework of this model argue in favor of the quasinuclear quark structure of hadrons. The resulting quark interaction appeared to be effectively short-range. This interaction is determined mainly by the exchange in the gluon channel: the calculated constituent gluon mass $`M_G=0.67\mathrm{GeV}`$ to be not small. The creation of mesons (pion included) is mainly due to the gluon exchange. The mass values of the lowest mesons ($`J^P=0^+,1^{},0^{++}`$) and their quark content are obtained. In the color channel $`\overline{3}_c`$ the bound states of the scalar diquarks with the masses $`m_{ud}=0.72\mathrm{GeV}`$ and $`m_{us}=m_{ds}=0.86GeV`$ are obtained. The dispersion relation technique allows us to calculate the form factors of light mesons using quark amplitudes in corresponding channels. The calculated values of the charge radii squared of pion and Kaon are in good agreement with data. The calculated values of the charge radii squared of u, d, s quarks are equal: $`r_u^2=2.06\mathrm{GeV}^2,r_d^2=1.75\mathrm{GeV}^2,r_s^2=1.03\mathrm{GeV}^2`$. The charge radii of non-strange and strange scalar diquarks are calculated: $`r_{ud}^2^{1/2}=0.55\mathrm{fm}`$$`r_{us}^2^{1/2}=0.65\mathrm{fm}`$$`r_{ds}^2^{1/2}=0.5\mathrm{fm}`$.
In this consideration one has neglected the forces of confinement. This is due to the fact that the model is actually based on the assumption that the confinement radius is much larger than the radius of dressed quarks, and also larger than the radius of the forces responsible for the existence of the low-lying hadrons. In the case of the orbital excited mesons: P-, D-, F-wave mesons one can not neglect the confinement potential. Therefore the main idea is the modification of precise theory by help of changing the interaction of quarks and anti-quarks at large range and do not charge the interaction at small range. Therefore one constructs the approximate model, in which there are free quarks, but the theory of quark-anti-quark scattering uses only the necessary part of the confinement potential. This idea can be used in different approach. In our case the confinement potential is imitated by the simple increasing of constituent quark masses. It allows us to construct the P-, D-, F-wave meson amplitudes and calculate the mass spectrum, which is in good agreement with data. We calculate the behavior of meson Regge trajectories for the low-energy region, which is based on the principles of multi-color QCD. In the framework of an approach developed previously for light quarks one calculates the scattering amplitudes of heavy quarks $`q\overline{Q}q\overline{Q}`$ and $`Q\overline{Q}Q\overline{Q}`$ (q=u, d, s; Q=c, b). The interaction of heavy quarks is described by forces corresponding of exchange of light white and colored mesons. The main role in the formation of the spectrum of heavy mesons is played by the forces that correspond to exchange of a massive gluon. It is necessary to take into account the renormalization of the quark amplitudes for light quarks, which is determined by the rescattering of the heavy quarks. We obtained the masses of lowest multiplets of c- and b-mesons with quantum numbers $`J^{PC}=0^+,1^{},0^{++}`$.
Then we use a quark interaction potential, which is obtained from the nonrelativistic limit of relativistic quark amplitudes of the Bootstrap quark model. But the quark amplitudes obtained in the Bootstrap procedure depend not only on the square t of the momentum transfer, but also on the energy variable $`s`$. Therefore, a literal transition to nonrelativistic potentials is not possible: these amplitudes rather correspond to quasipotentials. If the energy $`s=s_0`$ is fixed, and already at fixed energy the dependence on the momentum transfer is considered to be a potential nature.
We investigated S-wave baryons with quantum numbers $`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+,\frac{3}{2}^+`$ consisting of u and d quarks. The masses and wave function of the baryons were obtained from the solution of the nonrelativistic Faddeev equations for the three-quark system with the diquark potentials $`V_{0^+}`$ and $`V_{1^+}`$. One obtained the electric and magnetic form factors of the nucleons. The values of the masses of the nucleons and the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ isobar agree well with the experimental values, then we have a good agreement with experiment for the magnetic moments $`\mu _p=2.79(2.79)`$ and $`\mu _n=1.86(1.91)`$. The charge radius of the proton has been to be almost a factor of two smaller than experimental value $`R_p^2^{1/2}=0.4(0.8)\mathrm{fm}`$, charge radius of the neutron has been found to be zero. This calculation has not new parameters besides the Bootstrap quark model results. The behavior of additional linear potential are investigated and do not essentially change the results. In our paper a relativistically generalization of the three-body Faddeev equations was obtained in the form of dispersion relations in the pair energy of two interacting particles. The mass spectrum of S-wave baryons $`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+,\frac{3}{2}^+`$ including u, d, s quarks was calculated by a method based on isolating of the leading singularities in the amplitude. We searched for the approximate solution of integral three-quark equations by taking into account two-particle and triangle singularities, all the weaker ones being neglected. If we considered the approximation, which corresponds to taking into account two-body and triangle singularities, and define all the smooth functions of the sub-energy variables (as compared with the singular part of the amplitude) in the middle point of physical region of Dalitz-plot, then the problem reduces to one of solving simple algebraic system equations. The masses of the baryons of the two lowest multiplets with $`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+`$ and $`\frac{3}{2}^+`$ are calculated and found to be in a good agreement with the experimental results. The behavior of the electromagnetic form factors of nucleons and hyperons in the region of low and intermediate momentum transfers $`Q^2<1.5\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ is determined. The calculated value (without new parameters) of the charge radius of the proton was found to be $`R_p^2^{1/2}=0.4\mathrm{fm}`$, hyperons $`R_{\mathrm{\Sigma }^+}^2^{1/2}=0.43\mathrm{fm}`$, $`R_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}^2^{1/2}=0.39\mathrm{fm}`$, $`R_\mathrm{\Xi }^{}^2^{1/2}=0.38\mathrm{fm}`$. The charge radius of the neutron, and other noncharge hyperons were found to be practically equal to zero. In the framework of dispersion relation technique the relativistic Faddeev equations for charmed baryons are found. The approximate solutions of the relativistic three-particle problem based on the extraction of leading singularities of amplitudes are obtained. The mass values of lowest charmed baryon multiplets $`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+,\frac{3}{2}^+`$ are calculated. The behavior of electromagnetic form factors of charmed baryons ($`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+`$) in the region of low and intermediate momentum transfers $`Q^2<1.5\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ is determined. The calculated value (without new parameters) of the charge radii baryons like $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^{++}`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and so on $`(0.120.20)\mathrm{fm}`$. The charge radii of noncharge charmed baryons are equal to zero. We calculated the multiplets masses of radial excited baryon, included the Roper resonance, with quantum number $`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+,\frac{3}{2}^+`$ at $`N=2,56^{}`$. The problem of confinement is solved analogous to the case of excited mesons. Finally, a practical treatment of relativistic two- and three-hadron quark systems have been developed. The theory is based on the three principles of unitarity, analiticity and crossing symmetry. These principles are applied to the two-body subenergy channels. The scattering quark amplitudes allow to calculate the spectrum and electromagnetic properties of hadrons. In soft processes, where small momentum transfers are essential, the perturbative QCD technique is not applicable. In this case the way of phenomenology should include quark model results as well. Quark models make it possible to describe the qualitative properties of QCD in the nonperturbative region. In the framework of quark models important information is obtained on the properties of light mesons  and baryons . The reason for the successful use of quark potential models is connected with a successful choice of the effective parameters: the mass of the dressed quarks, the characteristics of the confinement potential, and the coupling constant $`\alpha _s`$. In quark models, which describe rather well the masses and static properties of light hadrons, the masses of the quarks usually have the same values for both mesons and baryons. However, this is achieved at the expense of some difference in the characteristic of the confinement potential. It should be borne in mind that for a fixed hadron mass the masses of dressed quarks which enter into the composition of the hadron will become smaller when the slope of the confinement potential increases or its radius decreases.
Therefore, conversely one can change the masses of the dressed quarks when going from the spectrum of s-wave mesons to s-wave baryons, while keeping the characteristic of the confinement potential unchanged. The mass spectrum of charmed and beauty mesons is subject of investigation of many theoretical papers, based on various approaches. Calculation in potential models are widespread .
The unquestionable advantage of the potential approach to the description of heavy mesons is its simplicity and transparency. It makes it possible to calculate (in the framework of the adopted model of the potential) the positions of the levels, the widths of radiative transitions between levels, and the widths of annihilation decays. Thus, in fact it succeeds in determining of behavior of the wave function of the system in a fairly wide range of distances, which is very important for an understanding of the dynamics of the interaction of the quarks. A serious difficulty of the potential approach is the fact that it cannot be fully substantiated in the framework of QCD. The method of QCD sum rules has been successfully and to determine the masses of the light and heavy mesons . In this approximation the vacuum condensates are considered as phenomenological parameters determined from the experimental data or from self-consistency of the sum rules. The most serious difficulty for the application of the sum-rule method to bottomonium (for instance) is the problem of taking into account relativistic corrections. So far there has been no such calculation.

## 2 Iteration method in the Bootstrap procedure

The project is devoted to the construction of low-energy quark scattering amplitudes. The amplitudes of dressed quarks are calculated in the framework of the dispersion technique with the help of the iteration Bootstrap procedure. The theory is based on three principles of unitarity, analyticity and crossing symmetry which are applied to the three-body sub-energy channels.
The iteration Bootstrap procedure for quark-quark and quark-anti-quark amplitudes was made with the four-fermion interaction as an input:

$$g_\nu (\overline{q}\gamma _\mu \stackrel{}{\lambda }q)(\overline{q}\gamma _\mu \stackrel{}{\lambda }q)$$
(1)
where $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }`$ are the Gell-Mann matrices. The point-like structure of this interaction is motivated by the idea of the two characteristic sizes in the hadron. On the other hand, the applicability of (1) is verified by the success of the De-Rujula-Georgi-Glashow quark model , where only the short-range part of the Breit potential connected with the gluon exchange is responsible for the mass splitting in hadron multiplets. However, the correct description of low-lying meson masses is impossible using the effective gluon exchange interaction (1) only. The large value of the $`\eta \eta ^{}`$ mass splitting and the small pion values indicate the existence of an additional interaction. Such an additional four-fermion interaction can be induced by instantons. This interaction should also be a short-range one because of the small radius of the effective gluon interaction. We have included this type of interaction in the iteration Bootstrap calculation. The scheme of the iteration Bootstrap procedure suggested in this paper is as follows. The partial amplitudes are calculated through the dispersion technique.
The zero approximation in Fig. 1d is drawn as the sum of diagrams shown in Fig. 1a, b, c etc. The amplitude of the first approximation (Fig. 1h) is obtained when the zero approximation amplitude is taken as an interaction like Eq.(1), i.e. the interaction in the first approximation is determined by the exchange diagrams of the zero approximation. The first approximation amplitude is the sum of diagrams shown in Figs. 1e, f, g etc. The use of the first approximation amplitude as an “interaction force” provides us with the second approximation, and so on. We consider the rescattering amplitudes in three sub-energy channels u, s, t.

We construct scattering amplitudes of the dressed quarks of three flavors (u, d, s) the poles of these amplitudes determine the masses of the light mesons . The masses of the constituent quarks u and d are of the order of 300-400 MeV; strange quark is 100-150 MeV heavier. The constituent quark is a color triplet and quark amplitudes obey the global color symmetry.

For the $`0^+`$ multiplet the discrepancy between calculated and observed values of masses more than for $`0^+`$ and $`1^{}`$. It is possible that this is due to the admixture of the glueball states as $`q\overline{q}q\overline{q}`$-states in the scalar mesons. In all the versions of our calculus there is a bound state in the gluon channel with the mass of order of 0.7 GeV. Its quark wave function is

$$(1.06(u\overline{u}+d\overline{d})+0.87s\overline{s})/\sqrt{3};$$

hence with a good accuracy it is a singlet of the flavor $`SU(3)_f`$–group. This bound state should be identified as a constituent gluon. In the diquark channel there are bound states with $`c=\overline{3}`$ and $`J^P=0^+`$.
The dispersion relation technique allows us to calculate the form factors of composite particles using the quark amplitudes in corresponding channels. The calculated values of both pion and Kaon charge radii are equal

$$R_{\pi ^\pm }^2^{1/2}=0.76\mathrm{fm}R_{K^\pm }^2^{1/2}=0.69\mathrm{fm}R_{K_0}^2=1.1\mathrm{GeV}^2$$
(2)
For the interaction with the photon current dressed-quark radii are determined by the behavior of quark amplitudes in the channel $`1^{}`$ near $`t=0`$. The calculated values of the charge radii are equal for u, d, s quarks:

$$r_{ud}^2^{1/2}=0.55\mathrm{fm}r_{us}^2^{1/2}=0.65\mathrm{fm}r_{ds}^2^{1/2}=0.5\mathrm{fm}$$
(3)
Parameters of this model are: cut-off energy $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=17.3`$, gluon constant $`g_V=0.226`$, four-fermion instanton interaction $`g_I=0.081`$, interaction with exchange of white isosinglet $`g_S=0.55`$, quark masses $`m=0.385\mathrm{GeV}`$, $`m_s=0.501\mathrm{GeV}`$, see Table 1.

## 3 P-, D-, F-wave mesons in the Bootstrap method

One of the most surprising, and so far unexplained, dynamical features of the spectroscopy of light quarks is the existence of five almost completely filled nonets in the quark-anti-quark $`q\overline{q}`$-system, predicted in the nonrelativistic quark model: two S-wave and three P-wave nonets. In the well established $`J^{PC}=1^{}`$ and $`2^{++}`$ nonets ideal mixing of the $`SU(3)_f`$ singlet and isoscalar components of the octet is realized, and this implies the suppression of the transition $`(u\overline{u}+d\overline{d})/\sqrt{2}s\overline{s}`$ in these channels (the Okubo-Zweig-Iitzuka-rule). We should say that the simplest nonrelativistic quark model predicts ideal nonets. The status of the axial with $`J^{PC}=1^{++}`$ and $`1^+`$ is not as clear as the status of the tensor mesons. Apparently, the $`1^{++}`$ nonet is also an ideal nonet. The $`1^+`$ nonet is not yet completely filled, with eight of the ten members established. The strange meson $`K_1^{}`$, belonging to the multiplet with $`J^{PC}=1^{++}`$, is observed in a mixture with the meson $`K_1`$ of the multiplet with $`J^{PC}=1^+`$. Experimentally, the $`K_1^{}`$ meson is observed with the main decay channel Kp, and $`K_1`$ is observed with the main channel $`K^{}\pi `$.
The pseudoscalar $`0^+`$ nonet is not ideal. Nowadays, the reason for this is understood. It is connected with the solution of the U(1)-problem in QCD, and with instanton contributions . At present the properties of the scalar mesons with$`J^{PC}=0^{++}`$ are among the most obscure aspects of the spectroscopy of light mesons. Although the resonances $`a_0`$$`f_0`$$`K_0^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{f}_0`$ can be considered well established, their interpretation in the language of the quark model is not clear. The superficially natural assumption that they form a nonet of $`q\overline{q}`$ states cannot be reconciled with their masses. This may be due to the existence of an appreciable admixture of glueball states or multiquark states in the scalar mesons . In this section the Bootstrap quark model technique allows us to calculate the spectra mass of P-, D-, F-mesons. The Regge trajectories for the low-energy region, which describe the mesonic resonances with orbital numbers $`L=0,1,2,3`$ are constructed.
The technique of carrying out the Bootstrap procedure of excited mesonic states is analogous to one of low-lying mesons. However, the forces of the interaction between quarks are effectively of short range. The effective short-range nature is a consequence of two circumstances. Exchange of a gluon state is most important in the interaction of the quarks. A constituent gluon is a fairly massive particle (700 MeV), and this is one of the reasons for the short-range nature. The other circumstance is that the quark amplitude depend relatively weak on the energy in the region $`t<0`$. Since the values of the amplitudes of the crossed channels for $`t<0`$ are precisely the interaction forces, relatively small variation of quark amplitude in the region $`t<0`$ lead to an extra decrease of the range of interaction of the quarks. This is connected with the assumption that the confinement radius is much larger than the radius of the forces responsible for the existence of the low-lying hadrons, i.e. the confinement forces can be neglected. But when one researches the excited states the confinement potential can not be neglected. The main idea is the modification of precise theory by help of changing the interaction of quarks and anti-quarks at large range and do not change the interaction at small range. Therefore one constructs the approximate model in which there are free quarks, but the low-lying spectrum of mesons is former.
In the framework of this model we can construct the theory of quark-anti-quark scattering using only the necessary part of the confinement potential. In our case the confinement potential is imitated by the simple increasing of constituent quark masses. The shift of quark mass (parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) effectively takes into account the changing of the confinement potential. We have shown that inclusion of only gluon exchange indeed does not lead to the appearance of bound states corresponding to the mesons of the P-, D-, F-waves. The using of mass shift $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_I`$ is possible to obtain the mass spectra of P-, D-, F-mesons (Tables 234. In Table 5 we use the results of Bootstrap quark model with u, d, s–quarks.

In the recent papers  the high energy asymptotic of multicolor QCD is considered, that allows to construct the Bethe-Salpeter equation for the n reggeized gluons. Then the author obtained the Pomeron trajectory as the bound state of two reggeized gluons. Therefore it is important to obtain the meson Regge trajectories of glueballs.

## 4 Heavy mesons ($`J^{PC}=0^+,1^{},0^{++}`$)

We consider the spectrum of the lowest $`Q\overline{Q}`$ and $`Q\overline{q}`$ mesons constructed from light (q=u, d, s) and heavy (Q=c, b, t) quarks. The main role in the formation of the spectrum of heavy mesons is played by the forces that correspond to exchange of a massive gluon. Owing to the point-like nature of the interaction of heavy quarks, their contribution leads only to numerical renormalization of the loop-diagrams of light quarks. Therefore, the introduced vertex function of the interaction of heavy quarks can effectively take into account his renormalization. The parameters $`\alpha _Q`$ and $`\alpha _{Qq}`$ of the interaction of heavy quarks and cut-off parameters $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_Q`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Qq}`$ are given by a definite set of experimental values of $`Q\overline{Q}`$ and $`Q\overline{q}`$-mesons.

We have obtained the masses of mesons with c and b quarks
($`J^{PC}=0^+`$,$`0^{++}`$,$`1^{}`$). In the calculation we have used the parameters $`\alpha _Q`$ and $`\alpha _{Qq}`$, and also the parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_Q`$, the cut-off in the scattering amplitude of heavy quarks. The cut-off in the scattering amplitude of heavy quarks with light quarks has been chosen in the following form: $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Qq}=\frac{1}{4}(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }_Q}+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }_q})^2`$. The value $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_q=17.3`$ and masses $`m_{u,d}=385\mathrm{MeV}`$, $`m_s=501\mathrm{MeV}`$. The parameters $`\alpha _Q`$, $`\alpha _{Qq}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_q`$ have been determined for the c quark from the experimental values of the masses of the meson $`D`$, $`D^{}`$, and $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$, and for the b quark from the masses of the mesons $`B`$, $`B^{}`$, and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$. The masses of the heavy quarks are also parameters of the model and have been determined from the best description of the masses of the $`\eta _c`$ for the c quark and $`B_s`$ for the b quark. The results of the calculation of the meson mass spectrum are given in Tables 6 and 7 . Fig. 3 shows the approximation curve of the variation of the vertex function in (a) and that of the cutoff in (b) with increasing mass .

Our model is actually based on the assumption that the confinement radius is much larger than the radius of dressed quarks, and also larger than the radius of forces responsible for the existence of the low-lying hadrons. In the discussion of heavy mesons we have neglected the forces on confinement. However, estimates show that for meson of type $`\overline{q}t`$ the confinement radius becomes comparable with the radius of gluon exchange.

## 5 Bootstrap quark potential and nonrelativistic Faddeev equations. Electromagnetic properties of non-strange baryons

With a sufficient number of parameters the potential models give a good description of the spectrum of hadrons. However, a serious difficulty for potential scattering is that its characteristics cannot be calculated directly in the framework of QCD. If the gluon field is unable to follow a change of the quark system, there is retardation, and, as a consequence, the interaction acquires a non-potential nature. Under these conditions a successful description of hadron in the framework of the potential approach seems highly nontrivial. It is probable that the above-mentioned non-potential nature shows up only at intermediate distances. At short distances the Coulomb-like one-gluon exchange potential works, and at large distances a linear potential is applicable. In a purely potential approach the non-potential nature of the interaction at intermediate distances effectively reduces to a redefinition of the parameters of the potential, which in this approach are not calculated, but fitted for optimal agreement with the experimental data.
We use a quark interaction potential, which is obtained from the nonrelativistic limit of relativistic quark amplitudes of the Bootstrap quark model. The main contribution describing the interaction in the diquark channel (the states $`J^P=0^+,1^+`$) is determined by gluon exchange in the t channel:

$$(\overline{q}_c\stackrel{}{\lambda }\gamma _\mu q)A(s,t)(\overline{q}_c\stackrel{}{\lambda }\gamma _\mu q),$$
(4)
where $`A(s,t)`$ quark amplitude determines the strength of the interaction of the quarks in the gluon channel. The mass $`M_G`$ of the constituent gluon determines the region in which the gluon has a short-range nature and has the consequence that the gluon field can adjust to a change of the quark system and that non-potential effects are successfully included. However, the quark amplitudes obtained in the Bootstrap procedure depend not only on the square $`t`$ of the momentum transfer, but also on the energy variable $`s`$. Therefore, a literal transition to nonrelativistic potentials is not possible: these amplitudes rather correspond to quasi-potentials. Then in transforming from Bootstrap quark amplitudes to quark potential, the energy $`s=s_0`$ is fixed, and already at fixed energy the dependence on the momentum transfer is considered to be of a potential nature. Fixing of the energy $`s`$ requires the introduction of a momentum cut-off parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi `$ in the Fourier transformation. This parameter is chosen in such a way that the spectrum of low-lying mesons and scalar diquarks calculated in the framework of the Bootstrap procedure is reproduced. In our case we obtained $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi =5.55m`$, where $`m`$ is the mass of a constituent quark. The explicit form of the potentials of the quark interaction in a color-antisymmetric state with quantum numbers $`J^P=0^+,1^+`$ for non-strange quarks is given in Fig.4(a) and (b) .

For the confinement potential we have chosen the usual linear potential with a slope determined by the angle $`\alpha `$. We have considered three cases, in which the confinement potential has been added to the Bootstrap potential from the distances $`r_0=0.6,1.0,1.3\mathrm{fm}`$. The inclusion of such a potential shifts the spectrum of low-lying mesons. In this case the nature of the change of the spectrum is similar to the change of masses of the mesons and scalar diquarks due to a change of the constituent quark masses. Therefore, by inclusion of the confinement potential we have changed the masses of the quarks so as to reproduce the spectrum of low-lying mesons. In this case the Bootstrap potential was altered in the following way, the scale of the abscissa was changed in proportion to $`1/m`$, and the scale of the ordinate in proportion to
$`m`$. In contrast to most quark potentials, the Bootstrap potential is finite at $`r=0`$ because of the cut-off in the energy introduced in the calculation of Bootstrap quark amplitudes. Moreover, the momentum cut-off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi `$ leads to small oscillations of the potential at distances $`1.5\mathrm{fm}`$, which are important for excited states and do not have a significant effect on the spectrum of low-lying baryons.
We have investigated S-wave baryons with the quantum numbers $`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+,\frac{3}{2}^+`$ consisting of u and d quarks. The masses and wave functions of the baryons were obtained from the solution of the Faddeev equations for the three-quark system with the diquark potentials $`V_{0^+}`$ and $`V_{1^+}`$. Three-particle forces were not included in this case. The results of the calculations are given in Table 8.

The values of the masses of the nucleons and the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ isobar agree well with the experimental values. In this case the mass of the constituent u and d quarks is 336 MeV (version (II),Fig.4), which gives good agreement with experiment for the magnetic moments $`\mu _p=2.79(2.79)`$, $`\mu _n=1.86(1.91)`$. The charge radius of the proton has been found to be a factor of two smaller than the experimental value, $`R_p^2^{1/2}=0.4\mathrm{fm}(0.71\mathrm{fm})`$.
The aim of this calculation is to investigate the possibility of describing the lowest three-quark systems by means of a Bootstrap potential, using the nonrelativistic Faddeev equations . the results of the calculations show that the spin-spin splitting of the levels $`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+,\frac{3}{2}^+`$, which depends on the wave function of the diquark at $`r=0`$, is reproduced rather well. Our values of the mass of the constituent quarks are close to the standard values. Therefore, the magnetic moment of the nucleons and the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ isobar agree with the experimental values. The parameter $`v/c`$ shows that we are dealing with a relativistic system of three particles. Therefore, the next step must be to calculate the characteristics of baryons in relativistic treatment.

## 6 Relativistic three-quark equations and spectroscopy of low-lying baryons

In the framework relativistic approach of three-hadron system one can consider the pair interaction between the particles -. There are three isobar channels, each of which consists of a two-particle isobar and the third particle. The presence of the isobar representation together with the condition of unitarity in the pair energies and analyticity leads to a system of integral equations in a single variable. Their solution makes it possible to describe the interaction of the produced particles in three-hadron systems.
In our consideration we construct a relativistic generalization of the three-particle Faddeev equations in the form of dispersion relation in the pair energy of the two interacting particles. By the method of extraction of the leading singularities of the amplitude we calculate the mass spectrum of S-wave baryons, the multiplets $`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+`$ and $`\frac{3}{2}^+`$, and we obtained the electric form factors of nucleons and hyperons at low and intermediate $`Q^2`$.

The diagrams in Fig.5 can be grouped according to which of the three quark pairs undergoes the last interaction, i.e., the total amplitude can be represented graphically as a sum of diagrams, as shown in Fig.6.

Using the diagrams in Fig.5 it is very easy to write down a graphical equation for the amplitude interaction of three particles. Then to write down a concrete equation we must specify the amplitude of the pair interaction of the quarks. For this we shall use the results of the Bootstrap quark model  and construct the amplitude of the interaction of two quarks in the states $`J^P=0^+`$, $`1^+`$.
The construction of the approximate solution of Fig.6 is based on the extraction of the leading singularities in the neighborhood of $`s_{ik}=4m^2`$. The structure of the singularities of amplitudes with a different number of rescatterings (Fig.5) is the following. The strongest singularities in $`s_{ik}`$ arise from pair rescatterings of quarks $`i`$ and $`k`$: a square-root singularity corresponding to a threshold and pole singularities corresponding to bound states (on the first sheet in the case of real bound states, and on the second sheet in the case of virtual bound states). The diagrams of Fig.1 (b) and (c) have only these two-particle singularities. In addition to two-particle singularities the diagrams of Fig.1 (d) and (e) have their own specific triangle singularities. The diagram of Fig.1 (f) describes a larger number of three-particle singularities. In addition to singularities of the triangle type it contains other weaker singularities. Such a classification of singularities makes it possible to search for an approximate solution of Eq.(Fig.6), taking into account a definite number of leading singularities and neglecting the weaker ones.
We use the approximation in which the singularity corresponding to a single interaction of all three particles, the triangle singularity, is taken into account. If we choose the approximation in which two-particle and triangle singularities are taken into account, and if all functions which depend on the pair energies will be determined at the central point of the physical region of the Dalitz plot, the problem of solving the system of integral equations reduces to one of solving simple algebraic equations . In Table 9 we give the calculated masses of S-wave baryons.

The calculated vertex functions $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$ turned out to be close to vertex function of diquarks in the Bootstrap procedure for S-wave mesons.
In our approximate solution of the three-particle equations the conditions of analyticity, unitarity and relativistic invariance of the constructed three-particle amplitudes are satisfied. This approximation is similar to the Bootstrap procedure for S-wave mesons.
The dispersion technique makes it possible to determine the form factors of composite particles (in our case, of baryons). On the one hand, the technique of dispersion integration is relativistically invariant and not related to the consideration of any specific coordinate system. On the other hand, there are no problems with the appearance of extra states, since in the dispersion relations the contributions of intermediate states are under control.
The behavior of electric form factor of proton as a function of the transverse momentum is shown in Fig.7. The form factor of non-strange quark will be assumed to be the same for u and d quarks: $`f_q(q^2)=\mathrm{exp}(q^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }_q)`$ with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_q=3\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ and $`f_s(q^2)=\mathrm{exp}(q^2/\mathrm{\Lambda }_s)`$ with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_s=5\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ for s-quarks. We can not use new parameters as compared to Bootstrap procedure.

The calculated value of the charge radii of proton and hyperons was found to be

$`R_p^2^{1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`0.4\mathrm{fm}(0.8\mathrm{fm})\text{[46]}`$
$`R_{\mathrm{\Sigma }^+}^2^{1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`0.43\mathrm{fm}R_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}^2^{1/2}=0.39\mathrm{fm}R_\mathrm{\Xi }^2^{1/2}=0.38\mathrm{fm}`$ (5)
The charge radius of the neutron was found to be practically equal to zero. It is probable that only the inclusion of higher excitations can lead to a result close to the experimental value ($`R_N^2=0.116\mathrm{fm}^2`$ , $`R_N^2=0.012\mathrm{fm}^2`$ ). One points out that the new parameters for the calculations of electric form factors of hyperons  did not use.

## 7 Charmed baryons ($`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+,\frac{3}{2}^+`$)

In the framework of dispersion relation technique the relativistic Faddeev equations for charmed baryons are found. The inclusion of relativistic effects in composite system is important in considering the quark structure of hadrons. We give the calculated masses of S-wave charmed baryon (Table 10 and consider a method of obtaining the electric form factors of charmed baryons with quantum numbers $`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+`$ .

The behavior of electromagnetic form factors of charmed baryons ($`J^P=\frac{1}{2}^+`$) in the region of low and intermediate momentum transfers $`Q^2<1.5\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ is determined. The calculated value (without new parameters) of charge radii: $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^+`$$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^+`$$`\mathrm{\Xi }_c^{+(\mathrm{\Lambda })}`$$`\mathrm{\Xi }^{+(S)}`$ are equal $`(0.120.20)`$ fm, for the neutral baryons the charge radii are equal to zero.

## 8 Conclusion

Calculations performed in the framework of Bootstrap quark model argue in favor of the quasinuclear quark structure of hadrons. The resulting quark interaction appeared to be effectively short-range. As was stated above, this interaction is determined mainly by the exchange in the gluon channel: the constituent-gluon mass appeared to be not small. Moreover, calculations reveal an additional reason for the short-rangeness of the interaction, connected with certain specific features of the quark-quark interaction. The value of the constituent gluon mass obtained in this model (700 MeV) seems to be rather reasonable: just this mass value is required by hadron phenomenology. The mass of the constituent gluon should be close to that of vector particles. This is a consequence of $`1/N_c`$-expansion .
Our calculation indicates an important role of interaction which is induced by instantons. Such an interaction is necessary for deriving both the pion mass and the $`\eta \eta ^{}`$ mass splitting. However, the relative contribution of the instanton-induced interaction is less than that with the gluon exchange, the ratio of forces about $`1/4`$. However, due to the rules of $`1/N_c`$-expansion this interaction influence slightly the other channels while in the $`\eta \eta ^{}`$ channel it provides the correct values of masses and gives the angle of $`\eta _1\eta _8`$ mixture close to that of the quark model. Just the minor addition of “instanton” interaction produces the correct value of the pion mass.
In the framework of the proposed approximate method of solving the relativistic three-particle problem, we have obtained a satisfactory spectrum of S-wave baryons. In this case it is obvious that the interaction forces which determine the baryon spectrum are in fact the same as for diquarks in the Bootstrap quark model for S-wave mesons. On account of the rules of the $`1/N_c`$-expansion the diquark forces are determined by one-gluon exchange (the instanton corrections are small in this channel). One-gluon exchange corresponds to a chromomagnetic interaction, which is responsible for the spin-spin splitting.
The mass spectrum of charmed and beauty mesons and baryons is the subject of many investigations.
In the framework of dispersion relation technique we calculated the mass spectrum of charmed mesons and baryons. The calculations show that the non-strange diquarks are in fact the same in the ordinary and charmed baryons. The interaction of the heavy quarks is described by quark amplitudes corresponding to exchange of light white and colored mesons. The main role in the formation of the spectrum of heavy mesons is played by the forces that correspond to exchange of a massive gluon. Therefore we can point out, that the considered Bootstrap quark model allows to describe the light and heavy hadron spectroscopy based on three principles: unitarity, analyticity and relativistic symmetry (crossing symmetry) in good agreement with experimental data.

Acknowledgment:
The authors would like to thank Profs. V.A. Franke,
Yu.V. Novozhilov, and H.C. Pauli. S.M. Gerasyuta thanks the Max-Planck Institut für Kernphysik in Heidelberg for the hospitality where a part of this work was completed.