text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recently a lot of activity has been dedicated to various studies of the Regge trajectories . Some researchers deal with the improvement and extension of the existing fits to hadronic total cross sections by including, apart from the slopes and intercepts of degenerate or non-degenerate linear Regge trajectories, also the relevant Chew-Frautschi plots . The most complete and updated Chew-Frautschi plots for various (linear) trajectories can be found in paper . The essential role of the non-linearity was recognized and scrutinized in the papers , where studies of the analytic and asymptotic properties of the trajectories were also performed. The connection of the Regge trajectories with dynamical models, based on non-relativistic potentials, hadronic strings, dual models etc. was studied recently in Refs. .

The basic problem in constructing Regge trajectories is to combine the nearly linear rise of the real part in the whole range of observed resonances with the presence of a sizable imaginary part. The combination of these properties in a single analytic function seems to be difficult, if not impossible, unless the linear part stops rising at larger values of the argument. This is true for the model we present below.

Besides the experimental evidence, the dominant idea about the continuous rising linear trajectories found strong support from the narrow-resonance (e.g. Veneziano) dual models, later replaced by hadronic strings. The “narrow resonance width” was treated in those models as an approximation, where resonances’ widths are considered negligible in comparison with the spacing between the neighbors. The data do not support this idea, thus ruling out the concept of continuously rising linear trajectories.

Exchange degeneracy (EXD) of the Regge trajectories (and the residues) with opposite signatures is an approximate symmetry based both on observations and theoretical speculations (the quark model, $`SU(3)`$ symmetry, duality). It is attractive as it relates various objects (trajectories, spectra of particles, residues, cross sections) reducing thus the number of the free parameters. The extent to which this symmetry is violated has been (and is still) debated ever since this symmetry was discovered. It depends on the considered reaction (trajectory) and the required precision (at the cost of the number of the free parameters introduced). In our analysis we consider both cases - exact EXD as well as its violation.

There are two basic theoretical restrictions, which must be satisfied by Regge trajectories - the threshold and asymptotic behaviour. The behaviour at the threshold is determined by unitarity and was studied in Refs. . On the other hand, only bounds exist on the asymptotic behaviour of the trajectories. Analyticity sets an upper bound  and there are some plausible arguments  in favour of a stronger upper bound. They suggest a square root asymptotic behaviour on the physical sheet, $`\alpha (s)(s)^{1/2}`$, for $`|s|\mathrm{}`$, implying, as we shall see, that the real part of the trajectories is bounded by a constant, i.e. that resonances “terminate” at some point.

In the present paper we construct an explicit model for light unflavored mesonic trajectories satisfying the above properties, i.e. our model has correct threshold and asymptotic behaviour and fits the data on both the masses and widths of the observed mesonic resonances. We did not include baryonic resonances, whose widths seem to show a regularity, $`Im\alpha (s)Re\alpha (s)`$, not shared by mesonic resonances .

We apply our analysis of the meson trajectories to both the positive (particles spectra) and negative (scattering region) values of their arguments (we denote it by $`s`$, although our results are crossing symmetric in the Mandelstam variables $`s,t,u`$) by fitting the parameters of the $`\rho a_2`$ exchange degenerate trajectory to $`\pi N`$ charge-exchange reaction data as in .

Although various aspects of mesonic trajectories have been already studied and clarified in several papers  we are not aware of any complete and coherent solution of the problem, satisfying the correct threshold behaviour and fitting the widths of the mesonic trajectories.

## 2 The model

The properties of the trajectories following from analyticity and unitarity have been discussed in Refs. . In the complex $`s`$-plane the trajectory $`\alpha (s)`$ has only right-hand branch lines apart from branch points at the intersection with another singularity in the $`l`$plane. The requirement that there are no crossing poles and that $`\alpha (s)`$ is bounded for $`s\mathrm{}`$, leads to a dispersion relation of the form

$$\alpha (s)=\alpha (0)+\frac{s}{\pi }_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑s^{}\frac{m\alpha (s^{})}{s^{}(s^{}s)}$$
(1)
where $`m\alpha (s)>0`$ since the pole must lie in the upper half $`l`$-plane. In other words, no complex singularity of the partial wave exists for real $`l`$. The boundedness of $`\alpha (s)`$ for $`s\mathrm{}`$ follows from the assumption that the amplitude $`A(s,t)`$ is bounded by a polynomial in $`t`$ and $`s`$. This restriction is equivalent to the condition that the amplitude, in the Regge form, should have no essential singularity at infinity in the cut plane. The condition that $`e\alpha (s)`$ is bounded by a constant, for $`s\mathrm{}`$, leads to

$$|\alpha (s)|<Ms^q,\text{for}s\mathrm{},$$
(2)
with $`q<1`$ and $`M`$ an arbitrary constant. Equation (1) implies that $`e\alpha (s)`$ cannot be exactly linear in $`s`$ but it does not give any information on the deviation from linearity unless a specific model has been selected for the imaginary part $`m\alpha (s)`$.

Unitarity requires the threshold behaviour

$$m\alpha (s)(ss_0)^{e\alpha (s_0)+1/2},$$
(3)
as shown in Ref. . For example, the first right-hand branch point will be at $`s_0=(2m_\pi )^2`$ for the $`\rho `$ trajectory, and $`s_0=(3m_\pi )^2`$ for the $`\omega `$. To build an explicit model we must constrain the asymptotic behaviour of the trajectory and find a rule to determine the contribution of several thresholds to $`m\alpha (s)`$. We borrow both properties of the model from Ref. . First, we assume the square-root asymptotic on the physical sheet

$$|\alpha (s)|s^{\frac{1}{2}},\text{for}s\mathrm{},$$
(4)
which satisfies the condition (2) and is realized in dual models . Secondly, we assume additivity of threshold contributions

$$\alpha (s)=\alpha (0)+\underset{n}{}\alpha _n(s),$$
(5)
where $`\alpha _n(s)`$ has only one threshold branch point on the physical sheet. We require this hypothesis, which seems to be plausible, in order to set up a completely soluble model; at least we are not aware of a reasonable alternative. Contrary to , we consider in the following only thresholds determined from pions and other mesonic resonances.

We start from a simple analytical model, where the imaginary part of the trajectory is chosen as a sum of the single threshold terms

$$m\alpha (s)=\underset{n}{}c_n(ss_n)^{1/2}\left(\frac{ss_n}{s}\right)^{e\alpha (s_n)}\theta (ss_n),$$
(6)
with the correct asymptotic and threshold behaviour. In Eq. (6) all $`c_n`$’s are positive . It should be stressed that this choice is a crude approximation to the complexity of the true imaginary part. For example, the exponent $`e\alpha (s_n)`$ should be a continuous function of $`s`$.

From the dispersion relation for the trajectory,

$$e\alpha (s)=\alpha (0)+\frac{s}{\pi }PV_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑s^{}\frac{m\alpha (s^{})}{s^{}(s^{}s)},$$

where $`PV`$ means the Cauchy Principal Value of the integral, the real part can be easily calculated . Defining $`\lambda _n=e\alpha (s_n)`$ we get:

$$e\alpha (s)=\alpha (0)+\frac{s}{\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{n}{}c_n\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda _n+3/2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda _n+2)\sqrt{s_n}}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(1,1/2;\lambda _n+2;\frac{s}{s_n})\theta (s_ns)+$$

$$+\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{n}{}c_n\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda _n+3/2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda _n+1)}\sqrt{s_n}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(\lambda _n,1;3/2;\frac{s_n}{s})\theta (ss_n).$$
(7)
From Eq. (7) we can get the slope

$$e\alpha ^{}(s)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{n}{}c_n\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda _n+3/2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda _n+2)\sqrt{s_n}}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(2,1/2;\lambda _n+2;\frac{s}{s_n})\theta (s_ns)+$$

$$+\frac{4}{3\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{n}{}c_n\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda _n+3/2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\lambda _n)}\frac{s_n^{3/2}}{s^2}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(1\lambda _n,2;5/2;\frac{s_n}{s})\theta (ss_n),$$
(8)
since the derivatives of the $`\theta `$-functions in Eq. (7) cancel. Equations (6) and (8) determine the width of the resonances through the relation

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(M^2)=\frac{m\alpha (M^2)}{Me\alpha ^{}(M^2)}$$
(9)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the width of the resonance and $`M`$ is its mass.

Suppose now that there is a threshold, higher than all resonances, at the position $`s_x`$ and with coefficient $`c_x`$. This threshold will contribute to the real part and to the slope, but not to the imaginary part in the resonance region. Its relevance to the real part of the trajectories and to the widths of the resonance will become clear in the following. Fits of the unknown parameters will be presented and discussed in the next Section. We only notice that Eq. (7) gives the complete real part of the trajectory, both in the time-like and in the space-like regions.

Of particular interest is the behaviour of the trajectory above $`s_x`$. From Eqs. (7-9) we can see that for $`ss_x`$ the $`e\alpha `$ reaches a saturation point and stays nearly constant.

## 3 Fitting the resonances masses and widths

The feature of the real part of trajectory, namely $`e\alpha (s)`$ tends to constant, when $`s\mathrm{}`$, means that the number of resonances lying on it is limited. As noticed before, approximate linearity in the region where experimental data require it, can be attained by introducing a threshold higher than the masses of all known relevant resonances. The highest threshold entails two unknown parameters, its position $`s_x`$ and the coefficient $`c_x`$, and contributes to Eq. (6) only above the resonance region. It can be considered as an effective threshold. This fact suggests an iterative method for the fitting procedure.

A rough estimate of $`e\alpha (s_n)\lambda _n`$, can be obtained from a linear trajectory, adapted to the experimental data. In this way we fix also the lowest order value of the slope. Intercepts and slopes of mesonic trajectories can be taken, for example, from the accurate analysis in . In addition to the lowest $`\pi \pi `$ threshold we will consider in the following the open channels, where one, or both pions, are substituted by mesonic resonances. Once the thresholds $`s_n`$ have been chosen, in accordance with the considered trajectory, Eq. (9) can be used to fit the unknown parameters $`c_n`$ from the experimental masses and widths of the resonances. Then, the fit of the spins of the resonances fix the remaining parameters, $`\alpha (0)`$, $`c_x`$ and $`s_x`$, from Eq. (7). In the minimization procedure an error can be associated with the spin of a resonance in terms of the error in the mass and the estimated errors for intercept and slope . In such a way we get the first order correction to the trajectory. Iterations can be performed by repeating the previous steps till a stable output is obtained.

The scarcity of the available experimental data, forces an a priori choice of the thresholds. In all cases with positive G-parity, the $`\pi \pi `$ threshold will be present, hence $`s_10.077`$ GeV2 for $`\rho `$ and $`f`$ trajectories. After a large number of trials we have chosen $`s_2`$ near 2 GeV2 for all trajectories. To be precise, for the $`G=+`$ trajectories, we set $`s_2=2.12`$ GeV2 that corresponds to a $`\pi a_2(1320)`$ threshold. The position of the last threshold, $`s_3s_x`$ , does not influence sensibly the result. Hence, if the $`\chi ^2`$ prefers a very high $`s_x`$ (we will see later that this is the case for $`\rho `$ and $`\rho +a_2`$ trajectories), we set $`s_x=30`$ GeV2. We have tried to insert extra thresholds in a large variety of ways without finding any improvement. By fixing the thresholds we limit the capability of the model in reproducing the experimental data, but, as we will see in the following, this still allows us to obtain a good agreement with experiment.

Let us first consider the $`\rho `$ and $`a_2`$ trajectories. In fact only the EXD $`\rho a_2`$ trajectory provides for a large set of input data: ten plus two, which need confirmation. In our model $`\rho `$ and $`a_2`$ have different thresholds, with different G-parity, and exchange degeneracy is necessarily broken. Experimentally however the breaking is small and not easily detectable in the real part. As a first attempt, we keep all the resonances on an EXD $`\rho a_2`$ trajectory and fit them with five correction cycles. Data for the resonances $`\rho (770),a_2(1320),\rho _3(1690),a_4(2040),\rho _5(2350)`$ and $`a_6(2450)`$ are taken from the Review of Particle Physics  and the zeroth order trajectory is written as $`e\alpha _{\rho a_2}(s_n)\lambda _n0.482+0.874s_n`$. Notice that $`a_6(2450)`$ needs confirmation and $`\rho _5(2350)`$ has been omitted from the summary table. Thresholds $`s_1`$ and $`s_2`$ are fixed as explained above, $`s_x`$ prefers to stay as large as possible and is fixed at 30 GeV2. In the output the intercept of the degenerate $`\rho a_2`$ trajectory increased to $`\alpha _{\rho a_2}(0)0.491`$ while $`c_10.140,c_20.902,c_x28.031`$. Figs. 1(a, b) show, as continuous lines, $`e\alpha (s)`$, $`m\alpha (s)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)`$ for the exchange degenerate $`\rho a_2`$. In agreement with Eq. (9), the widths of the resonances are affected to a larger extent by a breaking of EXD. To substantiate this statement we performed a new fit, keeping only the $`\rho `$ resonances, with the same thresholds. While the real part of the trajectory does not change appreciably, we obtain a good agreement for the widths as shown by the dashed line in Fig. 1(b).

The study of the $`f`$-trajectory becomes, in this approach, important under many aspects. Analyses of total cross sections depend crucially on its intercept. Moreover, EXD must be badly broken since attempts to describe together $`f`$ and $`\omega `$ in this model failed, supporting recent findings . The EXD violation can be understood by noticing that the width of the $`\omega (782)`$ is only four percent of the width of the $`f(1270)`$, and it will be difficult to find an analytic function satisfying these constraints. Starting from the resonances $`f_2(1270),f_4(2050)`$ and $`f_6(2510)`$, which needs confirmation , and the zeroth order trajectory $`\alpha _f(s)=0.697+0.801s`$, with errors quoted in , we get, with the higher threshold $`s_x=(2m_{f_2})^26.51`$ GeV2, a final intercept $`\alpha _f(0)=0.685`$ . At the end of 5th cycle, the parameters are $`c_10.155,c_20.247`$ and $`c_x=8.561`$. Figs. 2(a, b) show again the $`e\alpha (s)`$, $`m\alpha (s)`$ and the width, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_f(s)`$, compared with the experimental points. In Fig. 2 triangles symbolize $`\omega (782)`$ and $`\omega _3(1670)`$: these resonances are not included in the fit, but their masses and widths are drawn to show once again, that EXD breaking affects more the widths than the real part of the trajectories.

The real part of the degenerate $`\rho a_2`$ trajectory has been evaluated also for negative values of $`s`$, in the scattering region. From Eq. (7) a quasi-linear trajectory results with a very small positive curvature. In Fig. 3 we compare our result with an effective trajectory obtained by fitting pion charge-exchange scattering data . Only for $`s>0.4`$ GeV2 the agreement with the experimental points is very good. The curvature of the analytic trajectory has the correct sign, but is not sufficient at large $`|s|`$. A possible solution at large negative $`s`$ has been proposed in Ref. , where the fit to the existing data  of the differential cross section $`d\sigma /dt`$ for the process $`\pi ^{}p\pi ^0n`$ reproduces correctly the experimental data. However, in  the trajectory has logarithmic asymptotics and it would be difficult to construct a completely solvable analytic model in this case.

## 4 Conclusions

In this paper we attempt to systematize the light unflavored mesonic trajectories by simultaneous fits to the masses of the resonances and their widths. A deeper understanding of EXD plays an important role in this program. In addition to the known properties of the S-matrix, analyticity and unitarity, other assumptions are needed in order to have a completely soluble model. The imaginary part of a trajectory depends on the presence of one or more branch points, related to corresponding thresholds, for positive values of the argument. The first hypothesis is that these thresholds are additive. Moreover, analyticity places an upper bound on the asymptotic behaviour of a trajectory. The second assumption fixes a particular asymptotic form compatible with this constraint. These two assumptions, regarding only the imaginary part of the trajectory, determine the analytic structure of the model.

The parameters of the model, the position of the thresholds and their weight together with the intercept of the trajectory, have been determined for the EXD $`\rho a_2`$ trajectories and for the $`\rho `$ and $`f`$ alone, and the EXD violation has been discussed and explained in the context of the model.

Due to the asymptotic behaviour of the real part, only a finite number of resonances may lie on a given trajectory in this model. However, for the examples considered here the bound on the resonance masses is too high for putting any constraint on a future search of new mesonic states. For the $`f`$ trajectory in fact, a higher effective threshold will be probably present. In this respect our approach differs from the one in Ref. .

The general agreement with the experimental data, in the time-like and space-like regions, of this simple analytical model makes us hopeful about its capability in predicting properties of mesonic resonances, not yet confirmed or discovered.

## 5 Acknowledgment

We thanks Enrico Predazzi for stimulating discussions on the subject of this paper. One of us (L.L.J.) is grateful to the Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Università della Calabria and to the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare - Sezione di Padova e Gruppo Collegato di Cosenza for their warm hospitality and financial support. The work of L.L.J. was partly supported by INTAS, grant 97-1696, and CRDF, grant UP1-2119.


format: text

text:
# Lorentz and CPT Tests in QED

## Introduction

Lorentz symmetry and CPT appear to be exact fundamental symmetries of nature. All of the known physical interactions seem to be invariant under continuous Lorentz transformations consisting of boosts and rotations and under the combined discrete symmetry CPT formed from the product of charge conjugation C, parity P, and time reversal T. These symmetries are connected by the CPT theorem cptthm , which states that under mild technical assumptions all local relativistic field theories of point particles are symmetric under CPT.

Many of the shapest tests of Lorentz and CPT symmetry have been performed in atomic systems where the predominant interactions are described by quantum electrodynamics pdg ; cpt98 . For example, the Hughes-Drever type experiments cctests  typically compare two clocks or high-precision magnetometers involving different atomic species. The best CPT tests for leptons and baryons cited by the Particle Data Group are made by atomic physicists using Penning traps. These experiments have obtained a bound on the $`g`$-factor difference for electrons and positrons given by epenning

$$r_g^e=\frac{|g_e^{}g_{e^+}|}{g_{\mathrm{avg}}}\text{ }<2\times 10^{12},$$
(1)
while experiments with protons and antiprotons have obtained bounds on the difference in their charge-to-mass ratios given by ppenning

$$r_{q/m}^p=\frac{|(q_p/m_p)(q_{\overline{p}}/m_{\overline{p}})|}{(q/m)_{\mathrm{avg}}}\text{ }<9\times 10^{11}.$$
(2)
Similarly, two proposed experiments at CERN intend to make high-precision comparisons of the 1S-2S transitions in trapped hydrogen and antihydrogen cernhbar . The 1S-2S transition is a forbidden transition that can only occur as a two-photon transition. It has a long lifetime and a small relative linewidth of approximately $`10^{15}`$. Atomic experimentalists believe that ultimately the line center might be measured to 1 part in $`10^3`$ yielding a CPT bound

$$r_{1\mathrm{S}2\mathrm{S}}^H=\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }\nu _{1\mathrm{S}2\mathrm{S}}|}{\nu _{1\mathrm{S}2\mathrm{S}}}\text{ }<\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}10}^{15}10^{18}.$$
(3)
The main focus of the work described here is to investigate these and other tests of Lorentz and CPT symmetry performed in QED systems. The general goals of this work have been to analyze the sensitivity of QED systems to possible Lorentz and CPT violation, to uncover possible new signals that can be tested in experiments, and to estimate attainable experimental bounds in the context of a common framework that permits comparisons across different experiments. To accomplish this, we used the standard-model extension developed by Kostelecký and collaborators ks ; kp ; ck  as our theoretical framework. This model permits a detailed investigation of Lorentz and CPT tests in all particle sectors of the standard model. Our analysis here focuses on the QED sector of the standard-model extension. This is presented in the following sections and is used to examine five different QED systems: experiments in Penning traps bkr12 , clock-comparison tests kl99 , experiments with hydrogen and antihydrogen bkr3 , Lorentz and CPT tests with macroscopic spin-polarized materials bk00  and muon experiments bkl00 .

As a result of our investigations, several atomic experimental groups have recently reanalyzed existing data or taken new data to obtain improved bounds on Lorentz and CPT violation. Summaries of these bounds as well as estimates of bounds that can be attained in future experiments are presented in the following sections.

## Standard-Model Extension

Many different ideas for violation of Lorentz or CPT symmetry have been put forward over the years since the proof of the CPT theorem. A sampling of these includes the following: nonlocal interactions carr68 , infinite component fields ot68 , a breakdown of quantum mechanics in gravity hawk82 , Lorentz noninvariance at a fundamental level np83 , spontaneous Lorentz violation ks , and CPT violation in string theory kp ; emn96 .

To explore the experimental consequences of possible Lorentz or CPT violation, a common approach is to introduce phenomenological parameters. Examples of this include the anisotropic inertial mass parameters in the model of Cocconi and Salpeter cs58 , the $`\delta `$ parameter used in kaon physics lw66 , and the TH$`ϵ\mu `$ model which couples gravity and electromagnetism ll73 . Another approach is to introduce specific lagrangian terms that violate Lorentz or CPT symmetry cfj ; cg . These approaches have the advantages that they are straightforward and are largely model independent. However, they also have the disadvantages that their relation to experiments can be unclear and they can have limited predictive ability. To make further progress, one would want a consistent fundamental theory with CPT and Lorentz violation. This would permit the calculation of phenomenological parameters and the prediction of signals indicating symmetry violation. No such realistic fundamental theory is known at this time. However, a candidate extension of the standard model incorporating CPT and Lorentz violation does exist.

The standard-model extension of Kostelecký and collaborators is an effective theory based on the idea that Lorentz and CPT symmetry can be spontaneously broken in the context of a more fundamental theory ks . It is motivated in part from string theory kp . The idea is to assume the existence of a fundamental theory in which Lorentz and CPT symmetry hold exactly but are spontaneously broken at low energy. As in any theory with spontaneous symmetry breaking, the symmetries become hidden at low energy. The effective low-energy theory contains the standard model as well as additional terms that could arise through the symmetry breaking process. A viable realistic fundamental theory is not known at this time, though higher dimensional theories such as string or M theory are promising candidates. A mechanism for spontaneous symmetry breaking can be realized in string theory because suitable Lorentz-tensor interactions can arise which destabilize the vacuum and generate nonzero tensor vacuum expectation values.

Colladay and Kostelecký have derived the most general extension of the standard model that could arise from spontaneous Lorentz symmetry breaking of a more fundamental theory, maintains SU(3)$`\times `$SU(2)$`\times `$U(1) gauge invariance, and is renormalizable ck . They have shown that the theory maintains many of the other usual properties of the standard model besides Lorentz and CPT symmetry, such as electroweak breaking, energy-momentum conservation, the spin-statistics connection, and observer Lorentz covariance. Issues related to the stability and causality of the standard-model extension are investigated in Ref. kl . In addition to the atomic experiments described here, the standard-model extension has been used to analyze Lorentz and CPT tests with neutral mesons mesontests ; ckpv , photon experiments ck ; cfj ; jk99 , and baryogenesis bckp .

## TESTS IN ATOMIC SYSTEMS

To consider experiments in atomic systems it is sufficient to restrict the standard-model extension to its QED sector. The modified Dirac equation for a four-component spinor field $`\psi `$ of mass $`m_e`$ and charge $`q=|e|`$ in an electric potential $`A^\mu `$ is

$$\left(i\gamma ^\mu D_\mu m_ea_\mu \gamma ^\mu b_\mu \gamma _5\gamma ^\mu \frac{1}{2}H_{\mu \nu }\sigma ^{\mu \nu }+ic_{\mu \nu }\gamma ^\mu D^\nu +id_{\mu \nu }\gamma _5\gamma ^\mu D^\nu \right)\psi =0.$$
(4)
Natural units with $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$ are used, and $`iD_\mu i_\mu qA_\mu `$. The two terms involving the effective coupling constants $`a_\mu `$ and $`b_\mu `$ violate CPT, while the three terms involving $`H_{\mu \nu }`$, $`c_{\mu \nu }`$, and $`d_{\mu \nu }`$ preserve CPT. All five terms break Lorentz invariance. Each particle sector in the standard model has its own set of parameters which we distinguish using superscripts. Since no Lorentz or CPT violation has been observed, these parameters are assumed to be small. A perturbative treatment in the context of relativistic quantum mechanics can then be used. In this approach, all of the perturbations in conventional quantum electrodynamics are identical for particles and antiparticles. However, the interaction hamiltonians including the effects of possible Lorentz and CPT breaking are not the same.

### Penning-Trap Experiments

Comparisons of the $`g`$ factors and charge-to-mass ratios of particles and antiparticles confined within a Penning trap have yielded the CPT bounds in Eqs. (1) and (2). These quantities are obtained through measurements of the anomaly frequency $`\omega _a`$ and the cyclotron frequency $`\omega _c`$. For example, $`g2=2\omega _a/\omega _c`$. These frequencies can be measured to $`10^9`$ thereby determining $`g`$ to $`10^{12}`$.

We have analyzed Penning-trap experiments with electrons and positrons and with protons and antiprotons bkr12 . We find that to leading order in the Lorentz-violating parameters there are corrections to the anomaly frequencies that are different for particles and antiparticles, while the cyclotron frequencies receive corrections that are the same for particles and antiparticles. Both frequencies have corrections that cause them to exhibit sidereal time variations. We also find that to leading order the $`g`$ factor has no corrections, and therefore the figure of merit $`r_g^e0`$, even though there is explicit CPT breaking. Because of this, we have proposed using as an alternative figure of merit the relative relativistic energy shifts caused by Lorentz and CPT violation. This is a definition that can be used in any experiment and is consistent with neutral meson experiments, which use mass ratios.

Based on these observations, we suggested looking for two signals of Lorentz and CPT violation: one an instantaneous difference in anomaly frequencies for electrons and positrons, and the other sidereal-time variations in the anomaly frequency of electrons alone. Dehmelt’s group at the University of Washington has recently published two papers with the results of these observations dehmelt . In their first paper, they reanalyzed existing data and obtained a figure of merit $`r_{\omega _a}^e\text{ }<1.2\times 10^{21}`$ from a bound on the difference in the electron and positron anomaly frequencies. In the second paper, they analyzed more recent data for the electron alone and obtained a bound on sidereal time variations given by $`r_{\omega _a^{},\mathrm{diurnal}}^e\text{ }<1.6\times 10^{21}`$. This corresponds to a bound on the combination of components $`\stackrel{~}{b}_J^eb_J^emd_{J0}^e\frac{1}{2}\epsilon _{JKL}H_{KL}^e`$ defined with respect to a nonrotating coordinate system kl99  given by $`|\stackrel{~}{b}_J^e|\text{ }<5\times 10^{25}\mathrm{GeV}`$.

Although no $`g2`$ experiments have been made for protons or antiprotons, there have been recent bounds obtained on Lorentz violation in comparisons of cyclotron frequencies of antiprotons and $`H^{}`$ ions confined in a Penning trap ppenning . In this case the sensitivity is to the parameters $`c_{\mu \nu }^p`$, and the figure of merit $`r_{\omega _c}^H^{}\text{ }<10^{25}`$ was obtained.

### Clock-Comparison Experiments

The Hughes-Drever type experiments are atomic clock-comparison tests of Lorentz invariance cctests . These experiments look for relative changes between two “clock” frequencies as the Earth rotates. The “clock” frequencies are typically atomic Zeeman or hyperfine transitions. Kostelecký and Lane kl99  have made an extensive analysis of these experiments using the standard-model extension. They have obtained approximate bounds on various combinations of the Lorentz-violating parameters from the published results of these experiments. For example, from the experiment of Berglund et al. the bounds $`\stackrel{~}{b}_J^p10^{27}`$ GeV, $`\stackrel{~}{b}_J^n10^{30}`$ GeV, and $`\stackrel{~}{b}_J^e10^{27}`$ GeV have been obtained, respectively, for the proton, neutron, and electron sectors.

Since certain assumptions about the nuclear configurations must be made to extract some of these numerical bounds, these bounds should be viewed as good to within one or two orders of magnitude. To obtain cleaner bounds it is necessary to consider simpler atoms. This is done in the following sections, where it is shown that sharper bounds can be obtained for the proton and electron sectors. However, the clock-comparison tests continue to provide the best bounds for the neutron sector. For example, a recent experiment using a two-species noble-gas maser is consistent with there being no Lorentz or CPT violation in the neutron sector at a level of $`10^{31}`$ GeV dualmaser . This is currently the sharpest test for the neutron.

### Hydrogen-Antihydrogen Experiments

We have investigated the proposed experiments at CERN which will make high-precision spectroscopic measurements of the 1S-2S transitions in hydrogen and antihydrogen bkr3 . We find that the magnetic field plays a crucial role in the sensitivity of the 1S-2S transition to Lorentz and CPT breaking. For example, in free hydrogen in the absence of a magnetic field, the 1S and 2S levels shift by an equal amount at leading order in hydrogen and antihydrogen. Because of this, there are no leading-order corrections to the 1S-2S transition frequency in free H or $`\overline{\mathrm{H}}`$. For hydrogen in a magnetic trap, there are magnetic fields which mix the spin states in the four hyperfine levels. Since the Lorentz-violating couplings are spin-dependent, some of the 1S and 2S levels acquire energy corrections that are not equal. The transitions between these levels have leading-order sensitivity to Lorentz and CPT violation. However, these transitions are field-dependent, making them prone to broadening in an inhomogeneous magnetic field. To be sensitive to leading-order Lorentz and CPT violation in 1S-2S transitions, experiments would have to overcome the difficulties associated with possible line broadening effects due to field inhomogeneities.

We have also considered measurements of the ground-state Zeeman hyperfine transitions in hydrogen and antihydrogen bkr3 . We find that certain transitions in a hydrogen maser are sensitive to leading-order Lorentz-violating effects. These measurements have now been made by the group of Walswoth at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center using a double-resonance technique Hmaser . They have obtained bounds on the Lorentz-violation parameters for the proton and electron. The bound for the proton is $`|\stackrel{~}{b}_J^p|\text{ }<10^{27}`$ GeV. This is an extremely clean bound and is currently the most stringent test of Lorentz and CPT symmetry for the proton.

### Spin-Polarized Matter

Experiments at the University of Washington with a spin-polarized torsion pendulum eotwash  are able to achieve very high sensitivity to Lorentz violation due to the combined effect of a large number of aligned electron spins bk00 . The experiment uses stacked toroidal magnets that have a net electron spin $`S8\times 10^{22}`$, but which have a negligible magnetic field. The apparatus is suspended on a turntable and a time-varying harmonic signal is sought. Our analysis shows that in addition to a signal with the period of the rotating turntable, the effects of Lorentz and CPT violation would induce additional time variations with a sidereal period caused by Earth’s rotation. The University of Washington group has analyzed their data and have obtained a bound on the electron parameters equal to $`|\stackrel{~}{b}_J^e|\text{ }<1.4\times 10^{28}`$ GeV heckel . This is currently the best Lorentz and CPT bound for the electron.

### Muon Experiments

Despite the high precision of recent Lorentz and CPT tests for neutrons, protons, and electrons, it is important to keep in mind that particle sectors in the standard-model extension can be independent of each other and should separately be tested. The situation is similar to CP tests where violation is observed only in the neutral meson sector and not in the lepton or baryon sectors. A thorough investigation of Lorentz and CPT symmetry should therefore probe as many possible particle sectors as possible. For this reason, we also consider muon experiments, which involve second-generation leptons. We find that there are several different types of experiments that are sensitive to Lorentz and CPT. We have examined both experiments in muonium muonium99  and $`g2`$ experiments with muons being conducted at Brookhaven muong99 .

Our results are that experiments measuring the frequencies of ground-state Zeeman hyperfine transitions in muonium in a strong magnetic field are sensitive to Lorentz and CPT violation. If bounds on sidereal time variations are obtained at the 100 Hz level, then the Lorentz-violation parameter for the muon $`\stackrel{~}{b}_J^\mu `$ can be bounded at the level of $`|\stackrel{~}{b}_J^\mu |5\times 10^{22}`$ GeV. We also find that in relativistic $`g2`$ experiments using positive muons with “magic” boost parameter $`\delta =29.3`$, bounds on Lorentz-violation parameters are possible at a level of $`10^{25}`$ GeV. Experiments looking for sidereal time variations in the muon anomaly frequency would yield stringent new Lorentz and CPT bounds.

## SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

By using an extension of QED incorporating Lorentz and CPT violation, we have been able to analyze a variety of atomic experiments. We have shown that low-energy experiments in QED systems are sensitive to suppression factors associated with the Planck scale. We also find that experiments traditionally considered Lorentz tests are sensitive to CPT, and vice versa. The atomic experiments considered here complement those in particle physics and together they are able to test the robustness of the standard model to increasing levels of precision.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledge my collaborators Alan Kostelecký, Charles Lane, and Neil Russell. This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant number PHY-9801869.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Beyond $`Z20`$ the stability of nuclei requires additional neutrons because of the Coulomb repulsion among protons and the most stable nuclei are those with $`N>Z`$ . However, a large number of nuclei are possible whose $`N`$ and $`Z`$ numbers differ considerably from this line of $`\beta `$–stability. The properties of light systems near the limits of stability of proton/neutron-rich nuclei have attracted considerable experimental and theoretical attention . The availability of radioactive beams in various laboratories will likely provide many intriguing experimental information on the structure and reactions of these nuclei. The discovery of new isotopes  has opened a new path of nucleosynthesis by rapid proton capture . Similarly, the discovery of new neutron-rich nuclei near the drip line is important to understand the rapid neutron capture process in accreting stellar systems .

In the region of $`A80`$, nuclei with nearly equal number of protons and neutrons are of fundamental interest and can now be studied using radioactive beams . The structural properties of these nuclei are strongly determined by deformed shell gaps in the nuclear single-particle potential . The deformation properties of these nuclei change dramatically by addition or removal of one or two nucleons . The nucleon numbers ($`N`$ or $`Z`$) 36 and 38 have been identified with highly deformed oblate  and prolate  shell gaps, respectively. Recently, the very neutron-deficient $`Z=N+1`$ ($`T_z=1/2`$) nuclei 77Y, 79Zr and 83Mo have been observed . The deformation properties of these nuclei and the energies of the last occupied single-particle state of the odd proton are very crucial from stability and astrophysical points of view.

Wallace and Woosley  have conjectured a rapid proton capture process in accreting matter that provides a way for synthesizing very neutron-deficient nuclei close to the proton drip line in the $`A60`$–80 region . In this case the asymmetry energy is relatively unimportant because of the near equality of $`Z`$ and $`N`$. The existence of these new highly neutron-deficient isotopes stems from a delicate balance between the attractive nuclear force and the repulsive electrostatic force in atomic nuclei. On average, the nuclear force is attractive between a proton and a neutron and less attractive between two protons or two neutrons. Thus there is a limit to the excess number of protons over neutrons, or vice versa, one can have in a nucleus. This situation is further aggravated by the electromagnetic Coulomb repulsion among protons which strives to break the nucleus apart. The limits to the number of protons/neutrons are known as the proton/neutron drip lines. Due to the increasing importance from both the experimental and theoretical sides of the mass region $`A80`$, it is worthwhile to investigate the ground-state properties and spin of these nuclei, which is the prime aim of this work.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 is devoted to some basic points of the relativistic mean field (RMF) calculations. We present our results obtained by various RMF parameter sets in Section 3. Finally, the summary and concluding remarks are given in Section 4.

## 2 Calculations

We shall calculate the deformation properties and the single-particle energies and spins of the last occupied proton states for odd $`Z=N+1`$ systems using an axially deformed relativistic mean field (RMF) formalism . From the relativistic Lagrangian we get the field equations for the nucleons and the mesons. These equations are solved by expanding the upper and lower components of the Dirac spinors and the boson fields in a deformed oscillator basis with an initial deformation $`\beta _0`$. $`N_\mathrm{F}=12`$ and $`N_\mathrm{B}=20`$ oscillator shells are used as the expansion basis for the fermion and boson fields . The set of coupled equations is solved numerically by a self-consistent iteration method. The centre-of-mass motion is estimated by the usual harmonic oscillator formula. We evaluate the one-proton separation energy ($`S_\mathrm{p}`$) from the binding energies of the two neighbouring nuclei with $`Z`$ and $`Z1`$ protons :

$$S_\mathrm{p}(N,Z)=B(N,Z)B(N,Z1),$$
(1)
where $`B(N,Z)`$ is the binding energy for neutron number $`N`$ and proton number $`Z`$. The quadrupole deformation parameter $`\beta _2`$ is evaluated from the resulting quadrupole moment .

Our calculations will be performed with the NL1 , NL-SH , TM1  and NL3  parameter sets. The predictive power of these parametrizations is well known and some examples can be found, e.g., in Ref.  and references quoted therein. It is to be noted that the RMF parameter sets are determined by fitting nuclear matter properties, neutron-proton asymmetry energies, root-mean-square radii and binding energies of some spherical nuclei. Then, there is no further adjustment to be made in the parameters of the Lagrangian. The NL1 set was preferred in early calculations . However, it does not describe well the neutron skin thickness of neutron-rich nuclei due to a very large asymmetry energy, and predicts relatively large quadrupole deformations near the neutron drip line . To cure these deficiencies, data on neutron radii were included in the fit of the parameters of the NL-SH interaction. An interesting feature of the TM1 parametrization  is that in this set the sign of the quartic scalar self-coupling is positive (contrary to NL1, NL-SH and NL3). This could be achieved by introducing a quartic self-interaction of the vector field in the effective force. In general the quality of the results reproduced by TM1 is not superior to the standard non-linear sets and it has not been much used in the literature. The relatively new parameter set NL3 is considered to be very successful and there is confidence that it can be used fruitfully for the investigation of new regions of nuclear stability.

The calculation of odd-even and odd-odd nuclei in an axially deformed basis is a tough task in the RMF model. To take care of the lone odd nucleon one has to violate time-reversal symmetry in the mean field. In the present study only the time-like components $`V_0`$, $`b_0`$ and $`A_0`$ of the $`\omega `$, $`\rho `$ and photon fields are retained. The space components of these fields (which are odd under time reversal and parity) are neglected. They are important in the determination of properties like magnetic moments , but have a very small effect on bulk properties like binding energies or deformations and can be neglected to a good approximation . In our calculation of odd nuclei we employ the blocking approximation, which restores the time-reversal symmetry. In this approach one pair of conjugate states $`\pm m`$ is taken out of the pairing scheme. The odd particle stays in one of these states and its corresponding conjugate state remains empty. In general one has to block in turn different states around the Fermi level to find the one which gives the lowest energy configuration of the odd nucleus. In odd-odd nuclei (which will be needed in our calculations of separation energies) we have blocked both the odd proton and the odd neutron.

For known nuclei close to or not too far from the stability line, the BCS approach provides a reasonably good description of the pairing properties. However, in going to nuclei in the vicinity of the drip lines the coupling to the continuum becomes important. It has been shown that the self-consistent treatment of the BCS approximation breaks down when coupling between bound states and states in the continuum takes place . For most of the very neutron-deficient nuclei of our study odd-even mass differences are not measured and little is known about the precise effect of the pairing interaction. It is expected that for odd-even nuclei the effects of pairing are considerably decreased . In the present investigation we have chosen to use a BCS formalism with a small constant pairing strength, namely $`\mathrm{}_\mathrm{n}=\mathrm{}_\mathrm{p}=0.5`$ MeV. This value of the gaps contributes very little to the total binding (unless the pairing gap is varied considerably our results remain unchanged). This type of prescription has already been adopted in the past .

Certainly, for properties like radii of halo nuclei that sensitively depend on the spatial extension of the nucleon densities a more proper treatment of the continuum could be crucial, e.g., by means of the relativistic Hartree-plus-Bogoliubov (RHB) approach . In this model the wave functions of the occupied quasi-particle states have the correct asymptotic behaviour. Results of RHB and RMF-BCS calculations have been compared in Ref.  for neutron-rich nuclei in the deformed $`N=28`$ region. The two models have been found to predict almost identical binding energies and similar quadrupole deformations, though they differ significantly in the calculated r.m.s. radii (they turn out to be larger in the RMF-BCS model). A recent RHB study of deformed odd-$`Z`$ proton emitters in the $`53Z69`$ region using the NL3 set has been published in Ref. . For the lightest isotopes 107I, 108I and 109I reported in Table 1 of that work, the odd valence proton occupies a $`[422]3/2^+`$ Nilsson orbital (see below for notation) and the ground-state quadrupole deformations are $`\beta _2=0.15`$, 0.16 and 0.16, respectively. For comparison we have performed the calculations with our model and find the same $`[422]3/2^+`$ orbital for the three isotopes and deformations $`\beta _2=0.17`$, 0.18 and 0.19, respectively, in rather good agreement with the more sophisticated RHB method.

## 3 Results and discussion

We now discuss the results of our RMF calculations for the neutron-deficient nuclei 61Ga, 65As, 69Br, 73Rb, 77Y, 81Nb, 85Tc, 89Rh, 93Ag and 97In, i.e., the odd-proton, $`T_z=1/2`$ nuclei in the interval $`31Z49`$ with $`Z=N+1`$. For a given nucleus the solution with the largest binding energy corresponds to the ground-state configuration and the other solutions are the excited intrinsic states. In the present calculations we find two or three different solutions for most of the isotopes, each solution differing in the deformation from the others. All the solutions are often close in energy with one another, and sometimes they are nearly degenerate. In the case of finding almost degeneracy there is some uncertainty in the determination of the ground-state solution: a change in the inputs of the calculation (e.g., the parameter $`\mathrm{}\omega =41A^{1/3}`$ MeV) may alter the prediction for the ground-state shape. The low-lying excited solutions can be interpreted as solutions with coexisting shapes. The shape coexistence nature in the $`A80`$ region has been reported in Refs. .

In Tables 1–3 we present our RMF results for the binding energy and the quadrupole deformation parameter $`\beta _2`$. We also list the single-particle energy $`ϵ_\mathrm{p}`$ of the blocked state, occupied by the odd proton, as well as its Nilsson state labelings $`[Nn_3\mathrm{\Lambda }]\mathrm{\Omega }^\pi `$ ($`\mathrm{\Omega }^\pi `$ being the spin and parity of the orbit, for spherical solutions we use spherical quantum numbers). For these odd-mass nuclei the spin of the odd nucleon is the resultant spin of the nucleus. In the tables we also display results of microscopic-macroscopic (MM) mass models for comparison. The values from the tabulation of Ref. , based on the finite-range droplet model and folded Yukawa single-particle potential, will be labelled by MMa. The microscopic-macroscopic calculations described in Ref.  (mass formula plus Strutinsky correction) will be labelled by MMb.

The RMF calculations predict a moderate prolate and a moderate oblate solution for the 61Ga, 65As and 69Br nuclei (Table 1). The ground-state shape of 61Ga is prolate in all the four RMF parameter sets, and the quadrupole deformation parameter $`\beta _20.22`$ reproduces very well the value of the microscopic-macroscopic MMa model. The ground-state spin is $`1/2^{}`$ according to NL1 and $`3/2^{}`$ according to NL-SH, TM1 and NL3. The last odd proton is bound by $`1`$, $`0.9`$, $`1.6`$ and $`0.9`$ MeV, respectively. The MMa model proposes a spin of $`1/2^{}`$ for 61Ga, in agreement with the NL1 prediction. It is to be noted that sometimes there are several levels near the Fermi surface available to the odd proton. Then we blocked those levels in turn and chose the solution which corresponds to the maximum binding. However, we also noticed that two (or more, typically in spherical configurations) different blocked solutions may be very close in energy and deformation. In such cases it is difficult to select the ground-state solution. For example, this situation arises for the prolate shape of 61Ga with the NL3 set. We find a binding energy of 511.27 MeV ($`\beta _2=0.225`$) when we block the $`[312]3/2^{}`$ level, whereas the binding energy is 511.03 MeV ($`\beta _2=0.228`$) when the level $`[310]1/2^{}`$ is blocked. In the tables we present the result which corresponds strictly to the maximum binding. In the 65As nucleus the prolate and oblate solutions have very similar energies. Excepting NL1 where the prolate shape has a $`3/2^{}`$ spin, the spin of both solutions is $`1/2^{}`$. The ground state corresponds to the prolate shape, with a deformation $`\beta _20.23`$ as in the MMa model. The MMa spin is $`3/2^{}`$, as with NL1. For the ground state of 69Br the Nilsson orbital occupied by the odd proton is $`[404]9/2^+`$ in the four relativistic sets, which agrees with the MMa  and MMb  calculations. The RMF suggests an oblate 69Br ground state with a deformation $`\beta _2`$ around $`0.29`$, similarly to the MM models.

For 73Rb, 77Y and 81Nb (Table 2) we find different solutions that often have close binding energies. In detail, for the 73Rb nucleus the most bound solution is oblate ($`\beta _20.35`$) and the proposed spin is $`7/2^+`$ in all the parameter sets. The MM models, however, predict a prolate shape with $`\beta _20.4`$ and spin $`3/2^+`$ (MMa) or $`3/2^{}`$ (MMb), which agrees better with the RMF prolate solution. For 77Y we find a large prolate deformation in the ground state, with the exception of TM1 that predicts an oblate ground-state shape. Apart from the case of NL1, we also find a spherical $`1/2^{}`$ ($`p_{1/2}`$) configuration that appears as an excited state, though for TM1 it coexists with the oblate ground state. In TM1 the prolate solution lies at an excitation energy of about 1 MeV. Ignoring this energy difference, then $`[422]5/2^+`$ is the last proton orbit of 77Y in all the parameter sets which is supported by the MM predictions. Comparing the various solutions for 81Nb, we find that NL1 gives a nearly spherical $`9/2^+`$ ground state, NL-SH and NL3 predict a highly prolate $`1/2^+`$ ground state (like the MM models) and TM1 gives coexistent oblate and almost spherical $`9/2^+`$ shapes. (Actually, configurations of spin $`7/2^+`$, $`5/2^+`$, $`3/2^+`$ and $`1/2^+`$ with nearly zero deformation are found lying at energies very close to that of the $`9/2^+`$ configuration and all them originate from the spherical $`g_{9/2}`$ shell.) If we take into account that the RMF calculation has some uncertainty, or the increase in binding after performing angular momentum projection calculations (which is particularly sizeable for solutions with a large deformation ), and assuming the highly deformed shape as the ground state, then the Nilsson orbit of the last occupied proton is $`[431]1/2^+`$ in accordance with the microscopic-macroscopic calculations. The single-particle energy of the valence proton in the spherical state of 81Nb with the NL1 and TM1 sets is positive. In such a case the system is unstable against proton emission and we have included these solutions only for completeness.

The RMF sets yield an oblate ground state for 85Tc (Table 3), with $`\beta _2=0.22`$ and a Nilsson orbit $`[413]5/2^+`$ for the last occupied proton. There appears a nearly spherical $`3/2^+`$ configuration, which for NL1 is degenerate in energy with the oblate shape. The MMa and RMF predictions do not agree, the latter being closer to the MMb solution. The ground-state shape and the Nilsson orbit are parameter dependent for the 89Rh nucleus (Table 3). NL1 suggests a $`\beta _2=0.16`$ solution of spin $`5/2^+`$, similarly to MMa, NL-SH points to a $`\beta _2=0.20`$ shape of spin $`3/2^+`$, and for TM1 and NL3 the prolate and oblate solutions nearly have the same energy. The MMb model favours a spherical configuration. We find low-lying prolate and oblate solutions for 93Ag. The oblate solution is close to sphericity in the case of NL1 and TM1. The ground-state corresponds to a $`7/2^+`$ orbit with a $`\beta _20.14`$ deformation. The RMF parameter sets predict nearly spherical solutions for the 97In nucleus, due to approaching the $`Z=50`$ magic number. For both 93Ag and 97In, the RMF and MMa proposed ground states compare well.

Next we analyze the results for the recently observed $`Z=N+1`$, $`T_z=1/2`$ nuclei 77Y, 79Zr and 83Mo. The properties of 77Y have already been presented earlier and those of 79Zr and 83Mo are displayed in Table 4. In 79Zr and 83Mo the last odd nucleon is a neutron, and the spin and parity are decided by this last valence neutron. We found three solutions (prolate, spherical and oblate) for 79Zr with all the parameter sets. NL1 and TM1 predict a spherical shape of spin $`1/2^{}`$ for the ground state, whereas NL-SH and NL3 favour a largely prolate ground state ($`\beta _20.5`$) of spin $`5/2^+`$. The spin of the oblate solutions ($`\beta _2=0.18`$ for the four parameter sets) is $`9/2^+`$. The RMF ground-state solution for the 83Mo nucleus prefers an oblate shape in the NL-SH, TM1 and NL3 sets with a spin of $`7/2^+`$. On the other hand, NL1 suggests an oblate ($`7/2^+`$) and almost spherical ($`9/2^+`$) shape coexistence nature. Once more, the properties of the ground state are in consonance with the MMa predictions.

Amongst the odd-$`Z`$ nuclei studied here, only 61Ga, 65As, 77Y and 89Rh have been observed in experiment (see Janas et al.  and references – quoted therein). The experimental evidence suggests that 69Br, 73Rb, 81Nb and 85Tc are proton unstable, with upper limits of 100 ns and less for their lifetimes. The stability of 77Y in this region is particularly interesting and may be a consequence of the shape polarizing effect of the $`N=Z=38`$ core . With increasing $`Z`$ one would expect these odd-$`Z`$ nuclei to become more spherical and the odd proton to be more bound due to the influence of the $`N=Z=50`$ core. However, to our knowledge, 93Ag and 97In have not been observed and 89Rh remains the heaviest nucleus identified in this odd-$`Z`$ region so far.

Calculations of the one-proton separation energy $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ are crucial for predicting the stability of isotopes near the proton drip line. The $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ value tells about the relative stability of the last occupied proton. The larger the value of $`S_\mathrm{p}`$, the more proton stable is the nucleus. The nucleus is likely to be unstable against proton emission if $`S_\mathrm{p}<0`$. We have calculated the one-proton separation energy from the ground-state binding energy of two neighbouring nuclei using Eq. (1) and show the results in Table 5. We find that all of the nuclei considered here have a positive $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ with the exception of 81Nb. One should note that the determination of $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ arises from the difference of two large numbers, and a small change in the ground-state energy may alter the prediction. In this respect we should mention that the effects of the pairing correlations for the even-even $`(N,Z1)`$ systems used in Eq. (1) to calculate $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ may be more noticeable than in the pairing scheme adopted in our approximation. Also, other corrections that we have not taken into account, such as angular-momentum projection or correlations beyond mean field, like fluctuations, may easily shift the value of $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ by several hundred keV. Thus, in our calculation positive $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ values of about or less than a half MeV can be considered compatible with having a proton unstable system.

For all the parameter sets studied here, our RMF calculation successfully predicts the stable nature of the nuclei 61Ga, 65As, 77Y and 89Rh and the unstability of 81Nb against proton emission. The conclusion is less definite in some cases than in others (for example, 89Rh turns out to be stable in the NL3 calculation but $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ is about only 0.5 MeV). The nuclei 69Br, 73Rb and 85Tc are found to be stable ($`S_\mathrm{p}1`$ MeV), contrary to the experimental evidence. The unobserved 93Ag and 97In nuclei should be rather proton stable according to the RMF calculations (maybe with some doubt in the case of the TM1 set). The relativistic calculations indicate the stability of the recently detected 79Zr and 83Mo isotopes, with the only exception of 83Mo calculated with the NL-SH set. The microscopic-macroscopic MMa calculations  yield negative $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ values for most of the odd-$`Z`$ nuclei of Table 5. The MMa model predicts clearly that 79Zr and 83Mo are stable systems, but fails to point out the stability of 77Y and 89Rh. According to the MMa model 93Ag and 97In would be proton unstable nuclei.

In Table 5 we also display the charge radius $`r_{\mathrm{ch}}`$ for the ground-state solution. Taking into account the finite size of the proton, it is obtained from the r.m.s. proton radius as $`r_{\mathrm{ch}}=\sqrt{r_\mathrm{p}^2+0.64}`$ fm, where

$$r_\mathrm{p}^2=\frac{1}{Z}_0^{\mathrm{}}2\pi r𝑑r_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z\left[r^2+z^2\right]\rho _\mathrm{p}(r,z)$$
(2)
in cylindrical coordinates. For each nucleus the charge radii are almost equal with all the four parameter sets (the changes are generally less than 0.05 fm). We note that the magnitude of the r.m.s. radii changes little between the solutions of different deformation (again the changes are less than 0.05 fm, excluding 77Y, 79Zr and 81Nb where we have found maximum differences of $`0.1`$ fm between the various shapes). Hence we only show the charge radii of the ground-state solutions.

## 4 Summary and conclusions

In summary, we have calculated the binding energy and the quadrupole deformation parameter for odd $`Z=N+1`$, $`T_z=1/2`$ nuclei in the relativistic mean field model. The odd nucleon has been treated by the blocking procedure. The spin of the intrinsic states of the blocked nucleon, which is the resultant spin of the isotope, has been determined. The RMF calculations produce two or three different solutions for most of the $`Z=N+1`$ nuclei in the considered valley. In some of the cases the isomeric solutions are very close to one another and can be considered as coexistent shapes.

Shapes with large deformations are predicted near the proton drip line in agreement with the microscopic-macroscopic calculations . The spin of the $`Z=N+1`$ nuclei is well reproduced in comparison with the microscopic-macroscopic model, especially if one ignores the difference in binding energy between the various shape-isomeric states. The one-proton separation energies are found to be force dependent, but the four parameter sets studied generally agree in the trends predicted for $`S_\mathrm{p}`$. Overall the RMF predicts slightly bound configurations for the investigated systems. In the case of the 81Nb nucleus $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ is negative or zero, which indicates that the isotope is just beyond the stability line. In the present calculations the nuclei 69Br, 73Rb and 85Tc are proton bound. Experimentally these isotopes are unstable, with estimated half-lives of less than about 100 ns . The so far unobserved nuclei 93Ag and 97In are found to be rather proton stable. We have checked for the NL3 parameter set that most of the nuclei studied in this work are the predicted lightest stable odd isotopes. The exceptions are arsenic and zirconium for which the lightest proton stable isotopes are 63As and 77Zr, respectively.

We observe that the $`S_\mathrm{p}`$ values, and in some cases the energy differences between oblate and prolate or spherical solutions, are of the same order as the uncertainty in the binding energies of the present RMF calculations. To further avoid ambiguities in the prediction of separation energies and ground-state shapes, a more sophisticated RMF approach for binding energy calculations would be called for. In this connection the Dirac–Hartree–Bogoliubov approach is a prescription to treat the pairing effects in a more proper way . Finally, it should be remarked that in this work we have been concerned with bulk properties, such as binding energies, nuclear deformations and the average properties of the intrinsic states, and not with the spectroscopy of the bands in the studied nuclei. Therefore, only the intrinsic states have been considered. To project out onto good angular momentum states remains an interesting problem for future investigations of the relativistic mean field model.

The authors would like to acknowledge support from the DGICYT (Spain) under grant PB98-1247 and from DGR (Catalonia) under grant 1998SGR-00011. S.K.P. thanks the Spanish Education Ministry grant SB97-OL174874 for financial support and the Departament d’Estructura i Constituents de la Matèria of the University of Barcelona for kind hospitality.

## Tables


text:
# Charged particle rapidity distributions at RHIC

## Abstract

Using a multiphase transport model (AMPT), which includes both initial partonic and final hadronic interactions, we study the rapidity distributions of charged particles such as protons, antiprotons, pions, and kaons in heavy ion collisions at RHIC. The theoretical results for the total charged particle multiplicity at midrapidity are consistent with those measured by the PHOBOS collaboration in central Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s}`$ = 56 and 130 AGeV. We find that these hadronic observables are much more sensitive to the hadronic interactions than the partonic interactions.

PACS numbers: 25.75.-q, 24.10.Lx

Collisions of nuclei at high energies offer the possibility to subject nuclear matter to the extreme conditions of large compression and high excitation energies. Studies based on both non-equilibrium transport models  and equilibrium thermal models  have shown that the experimental data from heavy ion collisions at SIS, AGS and SPS, where the center of mass collision energies are, respectively, about 3, 5 and 17 AGeV, are consistent with the formation of a hot dense nuclear matter in the initial stage of collisions. With the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven National Laboratory, which can reach a center of mass energy of 200 AGeV, the initial energy density is expected to exceed that for the transition from the hadronic matter to the quark-gluon plasma. Experiments at RHIC thus provide the opportunity to recreate the matter which is believed to have existed during the first microsecond after the Big Bang and to study its properties.

Recently, charged particle multiplicity near mid-rapidity has been measured in central Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s}=`$ 56 and 130 AGeV at RHIC by the PHOBOS collaboration . The observed charged particle density per participant is found to be compatible with the predictions of the HIJING model that includes particle production from minijets produced in hard-scattering processes . Although the HIJING model implements the parton energy loss via jet quenching , it does not include explicit interactions among minijet partons and the final-state interactions among hadrons. Other models have also been used to understand the data from the PHOBOS collaboration. The LEXUS model , which is based on a linear extrapolation of ultra-relativistic nucleon-nucleon scattering to nucleus-nucleus collisions, predicts too many charged particles compared with the PHOBOS data . On the other hand, the hadronic cascade model LUCIFER  predicts a charged particle multiplicity near mid-rapidity that is comparable to the PHOBOS data . In this paper, we shall use a recently developed multiphase transport model (AMPT) , that includes both partonic and hadronic interactions, to study their effects not only on the total charged particle multiplicity but also on those of kaons, protons, and antiprotons.

In the AMPT model, the initial conditions are obtained from the HIJING model  by using a Woods-Saxon radial shape for the colliding nuclei and including the nuclear shadowing effect on parton production via the gluon recombination mechanism of Mueller-Qiu . After the colliding nuclei pass through each other, the Gyulassy-Wang model  is then used to generate the initial space-time information of partons. In the default HIJING, these minijet partons are allowed to lose energy via the gluon splitting mechanism and transfer their energies to the nearby strings associated with initial soft interactions. Such jet quenching is replaced in the AMPT model by explicitly taking into account parton-parton collisions via Zhang’s Parton Cascade (ZPC) . At present, only gluon elastic scatterings are included, so the partons do not suffer any inelastic energy loss as they traverse the dense matter. After partons stop interacting, they combine with their parent strings and are then converted to hadrons using the Lund string fragmentation model  after an average proper formation time of 0.7 fm/c. Dynamics of the resulting hadronic matter is described by a relativistic transport model (ART) , which has been improved to include baryon-antibaryon production from meson-meson interactions and their annihilation using cross sections given in Ref. . Also, the $`K^{}`$ resonances are explicitly treated by including their production from pion-kaon and pion-rho scatterings  and the inverse reactions of decay and absorption.

We first determine the parameters in the AMPT model by fitting the experimental data from central Pb+Pb collisions at center of mass energy of 17 AGeV . Specifically, to describe the measured net baryon rapidity distribution, we have included in the Lund string fragmentation model the popcorn mechanism for baryon-antibaryon production with equal probabilities for baryon-meson-antibaryon and baryon-antibaryon configurations . Also, to account for pion and the enhanced kaon yields in the preliminary data from the same reaction, we have modified two other parameters in the Lund string fragmentation model, following the expectation that the string tension is increased in the dense matter formed in the initial stage of heavy ion collisions.

In the Lund string fragmentation model as implemented in the JETSET/PYTHIA routine , one first assumes that a string fragments into quark-antiquark pairs with a Gaussian distribution in transverse momentum. Also, a suppression factor of 0.30 is used for strange quark-antiquark pair production relative to the light quark-antiquark pair production. Hadrons are then formed from these quarks and antiquarks. For a hadron with a given transverse momentum $`m_{}`$ determined by those of its quarks, its longitudinal momentum is given by the splitting function ,

$$f(z)z^1(1z)^a\mathrm{exp}(bm_{}^2/z),$$
(1)
where $`z`$ is the light-cone momentum fraction of the produced hadron with respect to that of the fragmenting string. Based on the Schwinger mechanism for particle production in a strong field, the production probability is proportional to $`\mathrm{exp}(\pi m_{}^2/\kappa )`$, where $`\kappa `$ is the string tension, i.e., energy in a unit length of string. The average squared transverse momentum of produced particle is thus proportional to $`\kappa `$. Increasing the string tension then leads to a broader distribution of the transverse momenta of produced quark-antiquark pairs and also a reduced suppression for strange quark-antiquark pairs. Since the average squared transverse momenta of produced particles obtained from Eq. (1) is $`p_{}^2=[b(2+a)]^1`$ for massless particles, the two parameters $`a`$ and $`b`$ are approximately related to the string tension by $`\kappa [b(2+a)]^1`$. In the HIJING model, the default values for $`a`$ and $`b`$ are 0.5 and 0.9 GeV-2, respectively. We change their values to 2.2 and 0.5 GeV-2 in order to increase, respectively, the pion and kaon multiplicities. These values of $`a`$ and $`b`$ correspond to a 7% increase of the string tension.

Results from the AMPT model for Pb+Pb collisions at $`\sqrt{s}=17`$ AGeV, based on the above modification of the HIJING and ART models, are shown in Fig. 1. It is seen that our model gives a reasonable description of the data on the rapidity distributions of total and negatively charged particles, net-protons and antiprotons, charged pions, and charged kaons. Since the probability for minijet production is very small in collisions at SPS energies, the partonic stage does not play any role in the collisions. We find that final-state hadronic scatterings reduce the proton and antiproton yields, but increase the production of kaons and antikaons by about 20%. In contrast, kaon yields in the default HIJING model are smaller than our final results by about 40%.

Since the number of strings associated with soft interactions in the HIJING model depends weakly on the colliding energy, the parameters in the string fragmentation model are not expected to change much with the energy. We thus use the same parameters determined from the experimental data at SPS to study heavy ion collisions at RHIC energies. In Fig. 2, the results for central Au+Au collisions at center of mass energies of 56 AGeV (dashed curves) and 130 AGeV (solid curves) are shown together with the data from the PHOBOS collaboration . The measured total charged particle multiplicities at mid-pseudorapidity at both energies are well reproduced by our model.

The energy dependence of charged particle yields at mid-rapidity from the SPS to RHIC energies is shown in Fig. 3. The proton yield is seen to have a minimum at energies between SPS and the highest energy at RHIC, while antiproton yield increases almost linearly with $`\mathrm{ln}s`$. As a result, the $`\overline{p}/p`$ ratio increases rapidly from about 0.1 at SPS to about 0.8 at the RHIC energy of $`\sqrt{s}=200`$ AGeV, indicating the formation of a nearly baryon-antibaryon symmetric matter at high energies. Meson yields in general exhibit a faster increase with energy; in particular, we find that the $`K^+/\pi ^+`$ ratio is almost constant within this energy range, suggesting the approximate chemical equilibrium for strangeness production. The $`K^{}/K^+`$ ratio increases gradually from 0.7 at SPS to about 1.0 at $`\sqrt{s}=200`$ AGeV as a result of the nearly baryon-antibaryon symmetric matter formed at high energies.

To see the effects of hadronic interactions, we show in Fig. 4 by dashed curves the rapidity distributions of charged particles obtained from the AMPT model without the ART model for central Au+Au collisions at 130 AGeV. In this case, there is a significant increase in the numbers of total charged particles, pions, protons, and antiprotons at midrapidity. The kaon number is, on the other hand, reduced slightly. As a result, the ratios of $`\overline{p}/p`$ and $`K^+/\pi ^+`$ in the absence of final-state hadronic interactions are $`0.80`$ and $`0.13`$, respectively, instead of $`0.66`$ and $`0.18`$ from the default AMPT model. We note that although the default HIJING  gives a total charged particle multiplicity at midrapidity that is consistent with the PHOBOS data, including hadronic scatterings would reduce its prediction appreciably.

Effects of partonic dynamics on the final hadronic observables can also be studied in the AMPT model. Turning off the partonic cascade in the AMPT model, we find that this leads to less than $`5\%`$ change in the final charged particle yields at $`\sqrt{s}=130`$ AGeV. This indicates that the multiplicity distribution of hadrons are not very sensitive to parton elastic scatterings. To take into account the effect of parton inelastic collisions, which are mostly responsible for energy loss, we include in the AMPT model also the default jet quenching, i.e., an energy loss of $`dE/dx=1`$ GeV/fm, before minijet partons enter the ZPC parton cascade. The results with jet quenching for central Au+Au collisions at 130 AGeV are shown in Fig. 4 by the dot-dashed curves. We see that the quenching effects are larger for pions than for kaons, protons, and antiprotons. Since the present calculations from the AMPT model without jet quenching already reproduce the data at the energy of 130 AGeV, and further inclusion of jet quenching of $`dE/dx=1`$ GeV/fm entails a 10% increase of the final yield of total charged particles at midrapidity, our results for the rapidity distribution of charged particles are thus consistent with none or a weak jet quenching at this energy.

We note that without initial nuclear shadowing on parton production the charged particle multiplicity at mid-rapidity at 130 AGeV increases by about 30%. This increase can nevertheless be offset by using different values for the parameters in the Lund string fragmentation. Since nuclear shadowing has negligible effects at SPS energies due to insignificant production of minijets, to reproduce both SPS and RHIC data using the same parameters requires the inclusion of nuclear shadowing on parton production.

In summary, using a multiphase transport model (AMPT), which includes both initial partonic and final hadronic interactions, we have studied the rapidity distributions of charged particles such as protons, antiprotons, pions, and kaons in heavy ion collisions at RHIC. With the model parameters constrained by central Pb+Pb collisions at $`\sqrt{s}`$ = 17 AGeV at SPS, the theoretical results on the total charged particle multiplicity at midrapidity in central Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s}`$ = 56 and 130 AGeV agree quite well with the data from the PHOBOS collaboration. We find that the antiproton to proton ratio at mid-rapidity increases appreciably with $`\sqrt{s}`$, indicating the approach to a near baryon-antibaryon symmetric matter in high energy collisions. Furthermore, the $`K^+/\pi ^+`$ ratio is almost constant within the energy range studied here, suggesting the approximate chemical equilibrium for strangeness production in these collisions. These hadronic observables are, however, less sensitive to the initial partonic interactions than the final hadronic interactions. To observe the effects of the partonic matter formed in the initial stage thus requires measurements of other observables such as $`J/\psi `$ suppression , the elliptic flow , and high $`p_{}`$ spectra . The magnitude of elliptic flow has been shown to be sensitive to the parton-parton cross sections in the ZPC parton cascade model , and the $`J/\psi `$ suppression results using the AMPT model indicate that the partonic matter plays a much stronger role than the hadronic matter .

The work of Z.L., S.P. and C.M.K. was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY-9870038, the Welch Foundation under Grant No. A-1358, and the Texas Advanced Research Program under Grant No. FY99-010366-0081, while that of B.A.L. was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY-0088934 and Arkansas Science and Technology Authority Grant No. 00-B-14.


text:
# Quantum Strategy Without Entanglement

## I Introduction

Game theory is the mathematical study of conflict situations, and it was, to all intents and purposes, born in 1944 with the publication of a single book Theory of Games and Economic Behavior by J.Von Neumann and O.Morgenstern. It now have a central place in economic theory, and it has contributed important insights to all areas of social science.

Recently, Game Theory was extended into quantum world and the quantum strategies were discussed and shown powerful. L.Goldenberg, L.Vaidman and S.Wienser constructed a two-party protocol for quantum gambling. In their protocol two remote parties were allowed to play a gambling game, such that in a certain limit it becomes a fair game. D.A.Meyer quantized the PQ Game, he found out that one player could increase his expected payoff by implementing quantum strategy against his classical opponent. J.Eisert, M.Wilkens and M. Lewenstein presented the Prisoner’s Dilemma. For the particular case they showed that this game ceases to pose a dilemma if quantum strategies are allowed for. S.C.Benjamin and P.M.Hayden quantized games with more than two players. They demonstrate that such games can exhibit ‘coherent’ equilibrium strategies.

In this paper, we study an interesting two player Card Game. In the classical game, one player (Alice) can always win with the probability $`2/3`$But if the other player (Bob) performs quantum strategy, he can increase his winning probability to $`1/2`$. Hence the unfair classical game becomes fair in quantum world. In addition, we point out that this strategy does not use entanglement, which is different from most of previous works.

In the following, we introduce the classical model of the Card Game at first. Then we give the quantum scheme of the Card Game. Further, we show that there is no entanglement in the quantum game.

## II The Model of Card Game

The classical model of card game is explained as following. Alice has three cards. The first card has one circle in its both sides, the second has one dot in its both sides and the third card has one circle in one side and one dot in the other. At the first step, Alice put the three cards into a black box. The cards are randomly placed in the box after Alice shakes it. Both players cannot see what happens in the box. At the second step Bob take one card from the box without flipping it. Both player can only see the upper side of the card. Alice wins one coin if the pattern of the down side is the same as that of the upper side and lose one coin when the patterns are different. It is obvious that Alice has $`2/3`$ probability to win and Bob only has $`1/3`$. So Bob is in a disadvantageous situation and the game is unfair to him.

Any rational player will not play the game with Alice because the game is unfair. In order to attract Bob to play with him, before the original second step Alice allows Bob to has one chance to operate on the cards. That is Bob has one step query on the box. In the classical world, Bob can only attain one card information after the query. Because the card is in the box, so what Bob knows is only one upper side pattern of the three cards. Except this he know nothing about the three cards in the black box. So in the classical field even having this one step query, Bob still will be in disadvantageous state and the game is still unfair.

But when we investigate the game in the quantum field, the whole thing is changed. We will see that the game turns into a fair zero-sum game and both player are in equal situation.

## III The Quantized Card Game

In the first step, Alice puts the cards in the box and shake the box, that is she prepares the initial state randomly. We describe the card state be $`|0`$ if the pattern in the upper side is circle and $`|1`$ if it is dot. So the upper sides of the three cards in the box can be described as

$$|r=|r_0|r_1|r_2$$
(1)
where $`r_0,r_1,r_2\{0,1\}`$, which means $`|r_0`$, $`|r_1`$ and $`|r_2`$ are all eigenstate other than superposition of $`|0`$ and $`|1`$.

After the first step of the game, Alice give the black box to Bob. Because Alice thinks in classical way, in her mind Bob cannot get information about all upper side patterns of the three cards in the box. So she can still win with higher probability. But what Bob use is quantum strategy. He replace the classical one step query with one step quantum query. The following shows how Bob query the box.

Bob has a quantum machine that applies an unitary operator $`U`$ on its three input qubits and give three output qubits. This machine depends on the state $`|r`$ in the box that Alice gives Bob. The explicit expression of $`U`$ and its relation with $`|r`$ is as following.

$$U=U_0U_1U_2$$
(2)
where

$`U_k`$ $`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{c}I_2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)\text{ }if\text{ }r_k=0\hfill \\ \sigma _z=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)\text{ }if\text{ }r_k=1\hfill \end{array}`$ (9)
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& e^{i\pi r_k}\end{array}\right)`$ (12)
The procession of query is shown in Figure 1. $`H=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right)`$ is Hadamard transformation and $`U`$ is the operator described above.

After the process, the output state is

$`|\psi _{out}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(HHH\right)U\left(HHH\right)|0|0|0`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`(HU_0H|0)(HU_1H|0)(HU_2H|0)`$ (14)
Because

$`HU_kH`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& e^{i\pi r_k}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right)`$ (21)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1+e^{i\pi r_k}& 1e^{i\pi r_k}\\ 1e^{i\pi r_k}& 1+e^{i\pi r_k}\end{array}\right)`$ (24)
So

$`HU_kH|0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1+e^{i\pi r_k}}{2}}|0+{\displaystyle \frac{1e^{i\pi r_k}}{2}}|1`$ (25)
$`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{c}|0\text{ }if\text{ }r_k=0\\ |1\text{ }if\text{ }r_k=1\end{array}`$ (28)
$`=`$ $`|r_k`$ (29)
From above, it is obvious to see that Bob can obtain the complete information about the upper patterns of all the three cards through only one query. There are only two possible kinds of output states in the black box, which is $`|0|0|1`$ or $`|1|1|0`$, that is two circles and one dot in the upper side or two dots and one circle (here three cards have no sequence between each other, for example, $`|0|0|1`$ is the same as $`|0|1|0`$ and $`|1|0|0`$). For the convenience of explanation, we assume that the states of the cards after first step is two circles and one dot ($`|0|0|1`$). After one step query, Bob knows the complete information about the upper patterns, but he has no individual information about which upper pattern corresponding to which card. Then he takes one card out of the box and see what pattern is in the upper side. If he finds out that he is in the disadvantage situation, the upper pattern of the card is dot ($`|1`$), he refuses to play with Alice in this turn because he know the down side pattern is dot definitely. Otherwise if the upper side pattern is circle ($`|0`$), then he knows that the down side pattern is either circle $`|0`$ or dot $`|1`$. So he continue this turn because he has the probability $`\frac{1}{2}`$ to win. Bob will continue the game because he has probability $`\frac{1}{2}`$ to win. Hence the game becomes fair and is also zero-sum.

## IV No Entanglement Applied

Entanglement is regarded as the crucial ingredient in quantum information and quantum computation. And in quantum games of previous works, most quantum strategies exceed classical ones because of the power of entanglement. In J.Eisert, M.Wilkens and M. Lewenstein and S.C.Benjamin and P.M.Hayden works, they used the $`J`$ gate to entangle the initial state. And one of the reason why their quantum strategies are better than classical strategies is that the initial state is max-entangled.

Recently, some works have shown that entanglement is not necessary for information processing and algorithm. This is also true in quantum game and quantum strategy. In D.A.Meyer’s work of PQ-Game, there is no entanglement in the strategies and the quantum game is still exceed its classical version. In this paper, the quantum strategy applied by Bob includes no entanglement and is still better than classical strategy.

The initial state input the quantum machine is $`|0|0|0`$, which is obviously separable. After the Hadamard transformation, the state is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2^3}}}\left(|0+|1\right)\left(|0+|1\right)\left(|0+|1\right)`$

Performed by $`U`$, the state becomes

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2^3}}}\left(|0+e^{i\pi r_0}|1\right)\left(|0+e^{i\pi r_1}|1\right)\left(|0+e^{i\pi r_2}|1\right)`$

And the states after the second Hadamard transformation is the output state

$`|r_0|r_1|r_2`$

In the whole procedure, the state is tensor products of the states of the individual qubits, so it is unentangled.. And because the operators ($`H`$ and $`U`$) are also tensor product of the individual local operators on these qubits, so it is obviously that in this quantum game there is no entanglement applied.

We can see that, from previous works, entanglement is important for static games (such as Prisoner’sss Dilemma and Battle of The Sexes Game), but may be not necessary in dynamic games (such as the PQ-Game and the Card Game in this paper). Why entanglement is the crucial ingredient in some quantum games but is not in others? In static games, each player can only control his qubit and his operation is local. So in classical world, the operation of one player cannot have influence on others in the operational process. But in quantum field, we think that through entanglement the strategy-changing of one player could influent not only himself but also his opponents. In dynamic games, players can control all qubits at any time step. So just like quantum algorithms, in dynamic games players can use quantum strategies without entanglement to solve problem, even entangled quantum strategies could be redescribed with other quantum strategies without entanglement.

## V Conclusion

In this paper, we generalize the classical card game into quantum world. We show that if Bob is given quantum strategy — one step quantum query — against his classical opponent Alice, she cannot always win with high probability. Both players are in equal situation and the game is a fair zero-sum game.

Further, in this paper, the quantum Card Game includes no entanglement. The quantum-over-classical strategy is achieved using only interference. Like in quantum information and algorithm, entanglement may be not necessary in quantum strategy. Quantum strategy could be still powerful without entanglement.

Acknowledgment: This project is supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China(No.10075041 and No.10075044) and the Science Foundation for Young Scientists of USTC.

## VI Figure Caption

The process through which Bob attain the information about the state of cards. Where $`H`$ is Hadamard transformation and $`U`$ is the operator Bob applied.