text:
# IFUP-TH 2002/2 Accounting for the finiteness of the Higgs-boson mass in the 3D Georgi-Glashow model

## 1 Introduction

Since the second half of the seventies , (2+1)-dimensional Georgi-Glashow model is known as an example of the theory allowing for an analytic description of confinement. However, confinement in the Georgi-Glashow model is typically discussed in the limit of infinitely large Higgs-boson mass, when the model is reduced to compact QED. In ref. , possible influence of the Higgs field to the dynamics of the Georgi-Glashow model has been studied both at zero and nonzero temperatures. This has been done not only under the assumption that the Higgs-field mass is finite rather than infinite, which allows this field to propagate, but in the Bogomolny-Prasad-Sommerfield (BPS) limit . This is the limit when the Higgs field is much lighter than the W boson (but is still much heavier than the dual photon). The first aim of the present paper is to generalize the zero-temperature results of ref.  to the case when the mass of the Higgs boson is of the same order of magnitude as the mass of the W boson. This situation is thus intermediate between the BPS limit and the limit of compact QED. In this way, we shall find the monopole potential and the Debye mass, and prove the convergence of the cumulant expansion associated to the average over the Higgs field. This will be done in the next Section.

Another aim of the present paper, which will be realized in Section 3, is to generalize this analysis to the $`SU(N)`$-case. The Debye mass and the parameter of the cumulant expansion will then be $`N`$-dependent quantities. The $`N`$-dependence of the latter will yield a certain upper bound on $`N`$ necessary to ensure the convergence of the cumulant expansion. This bound will turn out to be the exponent of the inverse parameter of the weak-coupling approximation, that will allow $`N`$ to vary in a wide enough range. We shall also find the values of the two leading coupling constants of the confining-string Lagrangian at arbitrary $`N`$.

The main results of the paper will be summarized in the Conclusions. In the Appendix, some technical details of the performed calculations will finally be outlined.

## 2 SU(2)-case

The Euclidean action of the (2+1)D Georgi-Glashow model reads

$$S=d^3x\left[\frac{1}{4g^2}\left(F_{\mu \nu }^a\right)^2+\frac{1}{2}\left(D_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^a\right)^2+\frac{\lambda }{4}\left(\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^a\right)^2\eta ^2\right)^2\right].$$
(1)
Here, the Higgs field $`\mathrm{\Phi }^a`$ transforms by the adjoint representation and $`D_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^a_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^a+\epsilon ^{abc}A_\mu ^b\mathrm{\Phi }^c`$. Next, $`\lambda `$ is the Higgs coupling constant of dimensionality \[mass\], $`\eta `$ is the Higgs v.e.v. of dimensionality $`[\mathrm{mass}]^{1/2}`$, and $`g`$ is the electric coupling constant of the same dimensionality.

At the one-loop level, the partition function of the theory (1) takes the following form :

$$S=d^3x\left[\frac{1}{2}(\chi )^2+\frac{1}{2}(\psi )^2+\frac{m_H}{2}\psi ^22\zeta \mathrm{e}^{g_m\psi }\mathrm{cos}(g_m\chi )\right].$$
(2)
Here, $`\chi `$ is the dual-photon field, and the field $`\psi `$ accounts for the Higgs field, when it is not infinitely heavy (i.e. one deviates from the compact-QED limit). Next, $`g_m`$ is the magnetic coupling constant related to the electric one as $`g_mg=4\pi `$. The Higgs-boson mass, $`m_H`$, reads $`m_H=\eta \sqrt{2\lambda }`$, and the monopole fugacity $`\zeta `$ has the form:

$$\zeta =\frac{m_W^{7/2}}{g}\delta \left(\frac{\lambda }{g^2}\right)\mathrm{e}^{(4\pi /g^2)m_Wϵ}.$$
(3)
In this formula, $`m_W=g\eta `$ stands for the W-boson mass, and $`ϵ=ϵ(\lambda /g^2)`$ is a certain monotonic, slowly varying function, $`ϵ1`$, $`ϵ(0)=1`$ , $`ϵ(\mathrm{})1.787`$ . As far as the function $`\delta `$ is concerned, it is determined by the loop corrections. It is known  that this function grows in the vicinity of the origin (i.e. in the BPS limit). However, the speed of this growth is so that it does not spoil the exponential smallness of $`\zeta `$ in the standard weak-coupling regime $`g^2m_W`$ (or $`g\eta `$) which we adapt in this paper.

Integrating further in eq. (2) over $`\psi `$ by virtue of the cumulant expansion, we get:

$$Sd^3x\left[\frac{1}{2}(\chi )^22\xi \mathrm{cos}(g_m\chi )\right]2\xi ^2d^3xd^3y\mathrm{cos}(g_m\chi (𝐱))𝒦(𝐱𝐲)\mathrm{cos}(g_m\chi (𝐲)).$$
(4)
In this expression, we have disregarded all the cumulants of the orders higher than the second, and the limits of applicability of this so-called bilocal approximation will be discussed below. In eq. (4), $`𝒦(𝐱)\mathrm{e}^{g_m^2D_{m_H}(𝐱)}1`$ with $`D_{m_H}(𝐱)\mathrm{e}^{m_H|𝐱|}/(4\pi |𝐱|)`$ standing for the Higgs-field propagator, and

$$\xi \zeta \mathrm{e}^{\frac{g_m^2}{2}D_{m_H}(0)}=\frac{m_W^{7/2}}{g}\delta \left(\frac{\lambda }{g^2}\right)\mathrm{e}^{\frac{2\pi m_W}{g^2}\left(2ϵ+\mathrm{e}^c\right)}$$
(5)
denotes the modified fugacity. In the derivation of eq. (5), we have in the standard way set $`m_W`$ for the UV cutoff in the weak-coupling regime and denoted $`cm_H/m_W`$.

As it is clear from eq. (4), the compact-QED limit is achieved when $`m_H`$ formally tends to infinity, i.e. $`c\mathrm{}`$. In ref. , there has been explored the opposite, BPS, limit $`c1`$. Since $`D_{m_H}(𝐱𝐲)m_H`$, one can impose the inequality $`g_m^2m_H1`$, which together with the weak-coupling approximation yields $`c1`$, and obtain from eq. (4) the following action:

$$Sd^3x\left[\frac{1}{2}(\chi )^22\xi \mathrm{cos}(g_m\chi )\right]2(g_m\xi )^2d^3xd^3y\mathrm{cos}(g_m\chi (𝐱))D_{m_H}(𝐱𝐲)\mathrm{cos}(g_m\chi (𝐲)).$$

Note that according to eq. (5), the modified fugacity $`\xi `$ remains to be exponentially small in this limit. That is firstly because $`ϵ>\frac{\mathrm{e}^c}{2}\frac{1}{2}`$ and secondly because, as it was discussed above, according to ref. , the function $`\delta `$ entering eq. (3) grows at $`c1`$ slower than exponentially. Next, the fact that $`D_{m_H}(𝐱)`$ rapidly vanishes at $`|𝐱|\mathrm{}`$ enables one to estimate the parameter of the cumulant expansion, which in this case reads $`\xi g_m^2d^3xD_{m_H}(𝐱)=g_m^2\xi /m_H^2`$. This quantity is exponentially small due to the exponential smallness of $`\xi `$, which proves the convergence of the cumulant expansion.

In what follows, we shall explore the action (4) in the regime intermediate between the BPS- and compact-QED limits, namely $`c1`$. First of all note that since $`c^2=2\lambda /g^2`$, $`\xi `$ will be exponentially small provided that $`ϵ(x)>\mathrm{e}^{\sqrt{2x}}/2`$ at $`x1/2`$. One can see that this inequality is always satisfied, since its r.h.s. is not larger than 1/2, while $`ϵ1`$. Next, analogously to the case $`c1`$, by noting that $`𝒦(𝐱)`$ rapidly vanishes at $`|𝐱|\mathrm{}`$, the parameter of the cumulant expansion can be estimated as $`\xi I`$, where $`Id^3x𝒦(𝐱)`$. This integral is evaluated in the Appendix. At $`\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c1`$ with $`a4\pi m_H/g^2`$ (which is obviously true in the weak-coupling regime), it reads

$$I\frac{4\pi }{m_H^3}\left\{\underset{n=1}{\overset{[1/c]}{}}\frac{a^n}{nn!}\left[n^{n2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(3n,cn)c^{2n}\mathrm{e}^{cn}\right]+c^2\left[\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c\right)\left(1\frac{c}{a}\mathrm{e}^c\right)+(\mathrm{e}1)\mathrm{ln}a\right]\right\}.$$
(6)
Here, $`[1/c]`$ stands for the largest integer, smaller or equal to $`1/c`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(b,x)=\underset{x}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑t\mathrm{e}^tt^{b1}`$ denotes the incomplete Gamma-function. In the case $`c1`$ under study, the sum entering eq. (6) contains a few terms, among whose the dominant one is of the order of $`a`$. These terms can thus be disregarded with respect to the term of the order of $`\mathrm{e}^a`$ standing in that equation, and we finally obtain: $`I\frac{4\pi }{m_Hm_W^2}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c\right)`$. Consequently, the parameter of the cumulant expansion, $`\xi I`$, will be exponentially small, provided that $`ϵ(x)>\frac{3}{2}\mathrm{e}^{\sqrt{2x}}`$ at $`x1/2`$. In particular, we should have $`ϵ(1/2)>3/(2\mathrm{e})0.552`$, which is clearly true, since $`ϵ1`$. Thus, cumulant expansion is convergent in the case $`c1`$ under study.

One can further straightforwardly read off from eq. (4) the squared Debye mass of the dual photon. It has the form $`m_D^2=2g_m^2\xi (1+2\xi I)`$, where as it was just discussed, the second term in the brackets is exponentially small with respect to the first one, and therefore $`m_D=g_m\sqrt{2\xi }(1+\xi I)`$. Obviously, unity and $`\xi I`$ here are the contributions to $`m_D`$ brought about by the first and the second cumulants in eq. (4), respectively. Note also that this result for $`m_D`$ obviously reproduces the compact-QED one (see e.g. ), $`g_m\sqrt{2\zeta }`$. Indeed, at $`m_H\mathrm{}`$, $`\xi \zeta `$ and, as it follows directly from the definition of $`I`$, $`I0`$, that proves our statement.

Similarly to how it was done for the case $`c1`$ in ref. , it is also possible in our case $`c1`$ to derive the representation of the action (4) in terms of dynamical monopole densities $`\rho `$’s. To this end, one should perform in the partition function the following substitution

$$\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}d^3x(\chi )^2\right]=𝒟\rho \mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{g_m^2}{2}d^3xd^3y\rho (𝐱)D_0(𝐱𝐲)\rho (𝐲)ig_md^3x\chi \rho \right],$$

where $`D_0(𝐱)1/(4\pi |𝐱|)`$ is the Coulomb propagator. After that, it is necessary to solve the resulting saddle-point equation

$$\mathrm{sinh}(\varphi (𝐱))\left[1+2\xi d^3y𝒦(𝐱𝐲)\mathrm{cosh}(\varphi (𝐲))\right]=\frac{\rho (𝐱)}{2\xi },$$
(7)
where $`\varphi ig_m\chi `$. This equation can be solved iteratively by imposing the Ansatz $`\varphi =\varphi _1+\varphi _2`$ with $`|\varphi _2||\varphi _1|`$. Introducing the notation $`f\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{\rho }{2\xi }\right)^2}`$, we then obtain:

$$\varphi _1(𝐱)=\mathrm{arcsinh}\left(\frac{\rho (𝐱)}{2\xi }\right),\varphi _2(𝐱)=\frac{\rho (𝐱)}{f(𝐱)}d^3y𝒦(𝐱𝐲)f(𝐲).$$

On the other hand, the average monopole density stemming from eq. (4) reads $`\frac{\mathrm{ln}{\scriptscriptstyle 𝒟\chi \mathrm{e}^S}}{𝒱\mathrm{ln}\xi }2\xi (1+2\xi I)`$, where $`𝒱`$ is the 3D-volume of observation. Therefore, at $`|\rho |\xi `$, we have $`f1`$, $`|\varphi _1||\rho |/\xi `$, and $`|\varphi _2|\xi I|\varphi _1||\varphi _1|`$ thus justifying our Ansatz. The obtained solution to the saddle-point equation yields the representation of the theory (4) in terms of $`\rho `$’s in the form

$$S=\frac{g_m^2}{2}d^3xd^3y\rho (𝐱)D_0(𝐱𝐲)\rho (𝐲)+V[\rho ].$$
(8)
Here, the multivalued potential of monopole densities reads

$$V[\rho ]=d^3x\left[\rho \mathrm{arcsinh}\left(\frac{\rho }{2\xi }\right)2\xi f\right]2\xi ^2d^3xd^3yf(𝐱)𝒦(𝐱𝐲)f(𝐲).$$

Note that the multivaluedness of this potential realizes the world-sheet independence of the Wilson loop in the theory (4). This is the essence of the string representation of the Georgi-Glashow model, discussed for the compact-QED limit, $`c\mathrm{}`$, in ref.  and for the BPS-limit, $`c1`$, in ref. .

Note also that at very low densities, $`|\rho |\xi `$, up to an inessential constant addendum, $`V[\rho ]\frac{g_m^2}{2m_D^2}d^3x\rho ^2`$, i.e. the action (8) becomes quadratic. Therefore, in this limit, any (even) correlator of $`\rho `$’s can be evaluated explicitly. In particular, the bilocal one reads $`\rho (𝐱)\rho (0)=(m_D/g_m)^2^2D_{m_D}(𝐱)2\xi (1+2\xi I)\delta (𝐱)`$, where in the derivation of the last equality we have used the exponential smallness of $`m_D`$. This yields the average squared density: $`\overline{\rho ^2}=𝒱^1d^3x\rho (𝐱)\rho (0)2\xi 𝒱^1(1+2\xi I)`$. Next, at $`|\rho |\xi `$, the average distance between monopoles, $`\overline{r}`$, is not smaller than $`\xi ^{1/3}`$. The volume of observation, $`𝒱`$, should be much larger than $`\overline{r}^3`$ and therefore $`𝒱`$ is much larger than $`\xi ^1`$ as well. This yields the relation $`\overline{\rho ^2}\xi 𝒱^1\xi ^2`$, which justifies the initial approximation $`|\rho |\xi `$.

## 3 SU(N)-case

The $`SU(N)`$-generalization of the action (2), stemming from the $`SU(N)`$ Georgi-Glashow model, has the form

$$S=d^3x\left[\frac{1}{2}(\stackrel{}{\chi })^2+\frac{1}{2}(\psi )^2+\frac{m_H^2}{2}\psi ^22\zeta \mathrm{e}^{g_m\psi }\underset{i=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}\mathrm{cos}\left(g_m\stackrel{}{q}_i\stackrel{}{\chi }\right)\right].$$
(9)
Here, $`\stackrel{}{q}_i`$’s are the positive root vectors of the group $`SU(N)`$. As well as the field $`\stackrel{}{\chi }`$, these vectors are $`(N1)`$-dimensional. Note that the $`SU(3)`$-version of the action (9), which incorporates the effects of the Higgs field, has been discussed in ref. . The compact-QED limit of the $`SU(N)`$-case has been studied in refs. , , and . The string representation of the compact-QED limit has been studied for the $`SU(3)`$-case in ref.  both in 3D and 4D. Here, similarly to all the above-mentioned papers, we have assumed that W bosons corresponding to different root vectors have the same masses.

Straightforward integration over $`\psi `$ then yields the following analogue of eq. (4):

$$Sd^3x\left[\frac{1}{2}(\stackrel{}{\chi })^22\xi \underset{i=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}\mathrm{cos}\left(g_m\stackrel{}{q}_i\stackrel{}{\chi }\right)\right]$$

$$2\xi ^2d^3xd^3y\underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}\mathrm{cos}\left(g_m\stackrel{}{q}_i\stackrel{}{\chi }(𝐱)\right)𝒦(𝐱𝐲)\mathrm{cos}\left(g_m\stackrel{}{q}_j\stackrel{}{\chi }(𝐲)\right).$$
(10)
The Debye mass of the field $`\stackrel{}{\chi }`$ can be derived from this expression by virtue of the formula  $`\underset{i=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}q_i^\alpha q_i^\beta \delta ^{\alpha \beta }`$. The proportionality coefficient which should stand on the r.h.s. of this relation can easily be found from the requirement that all root vectors have the unit length. This coefficient is equal to $`(N/2)`$, and the square of the Debye mass turns out to be $`m_D^2=g_m^2\xi N[1+\xi IN(N1)]`$. Note that this formula reproduces both the $`SU(2)`$-result of the previous Section and the $`SU(3)`$-result of the compact-QED limit ,  $`m_D^2=3g_m^2\zeta `$.

The new parameter of the cumulant expansion, $`\xi IN(N1)`$, will be exponentially small provided that at $`x1/2`$,

$$ϵ(x)>\frac{1}{2}\left[3\mathrm{e}^{\sqrt{2x}}+\frac{g^2}{2\pi m_W}\mathrm{ln}(N(N1))\right].$$

Setting in this inequality $`x=1/2`$ and recalling that 111Similarly to ref. , we assume here that the function $`ϵ`$ is one and the same for any $`N`$. $`ϵ(1/2)<ϵ(\mathrm{})1.787`$, we obtain the following upper bound on $`N`$, which guarantees the convergence of the cumulant expansion: $`N(N1)<\mathrm{e}^{15.522m_W/g^2}`$. Clearly, in the weak-coupling regime under study, this bound is exponentially large, that allows $`N`$ to be large enough too.

Next, the representation of the theory with the action (10) in terms of the monopole densities can be derived similarly to the $`SU(2)`$-case by virtue of the formula

$$\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}d^3x(\stackrel{}{\chi })^2\right]=$$

$$=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}𝒟\rho _i\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{g_m^2}{2}d^3xd^3y\rho _i(𝐱)D_0(𝐱𝐲)\rho _i(𝐲)ig_m\sqrt{\frac{2}{N}}d^3x\stackrel{}{q}_i\stackrel{}{\chi }\rho _i\right].$$

The analogue of the saddle-point equation (7) then reads

$$\mathrm{sinh}(\varphi _i(𝐱))\left[1+2\xi \underset{j=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}d^3y𝒦(𝐱𝐲)\mathrm{cosh}(\varphi _j(𝐲))\right]=\frac{\rho _i(𝐱)}{\sqrt{2N}\xi },$$

where $`\varphi _jig_m\stackrel{}{q}_j\stackrel{}{\chi }`$. Solving this equation iteratively with the Ansatz $`\varphi _i=\varphi _i^1+\varphi _i^2`$, where $`|\varphi _j^2||\varphi _j^1|`$, we obtain:

$$\varphi _i^1(𝐱)=\mathrm{arcsinh}\left(\frac{\rho _i(𝐱)}{\sqrt{2N}\xi }\right),\varphi _i^2(𝐱)=\sqrt{\frac{2}{N}}\frac{\rho _i(𝐱)}{F_i(𝐱)}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}d^3y𝒦(𝐱𝐲)F_j(𝐲),$$

where $`F_i(𝐱)\sqrt{1+\frac{1}{2N}\left(\frac{\rho _i(𝐱)}{\xi }\right)^2}`$. Next, the average density of monopoles of all kinds reads $`\frac{\mathrm{ln}{\scriptscriptstyle 𝒟\stackrel{}{\chi }\mathrm{e}^S}}{𝒱\mathrm{ln}\xi }\xi N(N1)[1+\xi IN(N1)]`$, that, in particular, reproduces the $`SU(2)`$-result. Therefore, the average density of monopoles of only one kind is of the order of $`\xi `$. Thus, at $`|\rho _i|\xi `$, $`F_i1`$, $`|\varphi _i^1||\rho _i|/(\xi \sqrt{N})`$, and $`|\varphi _i^2|\xi IN(N1)|\varphi _i^1|`$. The quantity $`|\varphi _i^2|/|\varphi _i^1|`$ is therefore of the order of the parameter of the cumulant expansion, that justifies the adapted Ansatz. The desired representation of the theory described by the action (10) in terms of the monopole densities then has the form

$$𝒵=\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}𝒟\rho _i\right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{g_m^2}{2}d^3xd^3y\underset{i=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}\rho _i(𝐱)D_0(𝐱𝐲)\rho _i(𝐲)V_N\left[\{\rho _i\}_{i=1}^{N(N1)/2}\right]\right\},$$

where the monopole potential is given by the following formula:

$$V_N\left[\{\rho _i\}_{i=1}^{N(N1)/2}\right]=d^3x\underset{i=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}\left[\sqrt{\frac{2}{N}}\rho _i\mathrm{arcsinh}\left(\frac{\rho _i}{\sqrt{2N}\xi }\right)2\xi F_i\right]$$

$$2\xi ^2d^3xd^3y\underset{i,j=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}F_i(𝐱)𝒦(𝐱𝐲)F_j(𝐲).$$

One can further naively assume that the criterion of the low-density approximation has the form $`|\rho _i|\sqrt{N}\xi `$ (although the average density of monopoles of one kind was discussed to be of the order of $`\xi `$). Indeed, similarly to the $`SU(2)`$-case, already under this inequality, the potential factorizes and becomes quadratic, so that (again up to an inessential constant addendum) $`V_N\left[\{\rho _i\}_{i=1}^{N(N1)/2}\right]\frac{g_m^2}{2m_D^2}d^3x\underset{i=1}{\overset{N(N1)/2}{}}\rho _i^2`$. Consequently, the bilocal correlator of monopole densities reads

$$\rho _i(𝐱)\rho _j(0)=(m_D/g_m)^2\delta _{ij}^2D_{m_D}(𝐱)\xi N[1+\xi IN(N1)]\delta _{ij}\delta (𝐱),$$

and, in particular, the $`SU(2)`$-result obviously recovers itself. Therefore, the average squared density of monopoles of any kind has the form: $`\overline{\rho _i^2}\xi N𝒱^1[1+\xi IN(N1)]\xi N𝒱^1`$. The inequality $`\overline{\rho _i^2}N\xi ^2`$, necessary for the justification of the initial approximation, will thus be satisfied provided that $`𝒱\xi 1`$. For the densities $`|\rho _i|\sqrt{N}\xi `$, we however have $`𝒱\overline{r}_i^3N^{1/2}\xi ^1`$ (where $`\overline{r}_i`$ is an average distance between the monopoles of the $`i`$-th kind), i.e. $`𝒱\xi N^{1/2}`$, rather than $`𝒱\xi 1`$. The initial naive low-density approximation $`|\rho _i|\sqrt{N}\xi `$, which ensures the factorization of the potential, is then fully justified for not too large $`N`$, i.e. it should be replaced by the right one, $`|\rho _i|\xi `$. In another words, for too large $`N`$, the requirement $`|\rho _i|\sqrt{N}\xi `$ becomes no more the low-density approximation, since it then allows $`|\rho _i|`$ to exceed significantly its average value, which is of the order of $`\xi `$.

Note finally that the obtained results lead to obvious modifications of the values of the confining-string coupling constants (string tension, coupling constant of the rigidity term, and so on). These modifications, which are due to the change of the Debye mass of the dual photon, can be accounted for by virtue of the formulae obtained in ref. . One should also take into account that the charges of quarks are distributed over the lattice of weight vectors of the group $`SU(N)`$, whose squares are equal to $`(N1)/(2N)`$. We finally obtain the following values of the string tension and the inverse coupling constant of the rigidity term (cf. refs.  and ):

$$\sigma =8\pi ^2g\sqrt{\xi }\frac{N1}{\sqrt{N}}\left[1+\frac{1}{2}\xi IN(N1)\right],\alpha ^1=\frac{1}{16}\frac{g^3}{\sqrt{\xi }}\frac{N1}{N^{3/2}}\left[1\xi IN(N1)\right].$$

## 4 Conclusions

In the present paper, we have explored the influence of the Higgs field to the dynamics of the (2+1)D Georgi-Glashow model and its $`SU(N)`$-generalization. To this end, the Higgs field was not supposed to be infinitely heavy, as it takes place in the compact-QED limit of the model. Owing to this fact, the Higgs field starts propagating, that leads to the additional interaction between monopoles and, consequently, to the modification of the conventional sine-Gordon theory of the dual-photon field. Contrary to the previous analysis, performed in ref.  in the BPS limit, in the present paper the Higgs-boson mass was considered to be of the order of the W-boson mass. In this regime, combined with the standard weak-coupling approximation, the Debye mass of the dual photon and the potential of monopole densities have been found. In the low-density limit, the latter enables one to evaluate correlators of densities to any order. There has also been demonstrated that the existing data on the monopole fugacity provide the convergence of the cumulant expansion, which is used for the average over the Higgs field. This justifies the bilocal approximation adapted for the performed analysis.

After that, the above-described investigation has been generalized to the case of the $`SU(N)`$ Georgi-Glashow model with $`N2`$. The results obtained in this way reproduce, in particular, the respective $`(N=2)`$-ones. There has also been found the upper bound for $`N`$, necessary to ensure the convergence of the above-mentioned cumulant expansion. This bound is a certain exponent of the ratio of the W-boson mass to the squared electric coupling constant. It is therefore an exponentially large quantity in the weak-coupling regime, that yields an enough broad range for the variation of $`N`$. Finally, we have found the values of the two leading coupling constants of the confining-string Lagrangian at arbitrary $`N`$.

## 5 Acknowledgments

The author is greatful for useful discussions to Prof. A. Di Giacomo and Dr. N.O. Agasian. He is also greatful to Prof. A. Di Giacomo and to the whole staff of the Physics Department of the University of Pisa for cordial hospitality. This work has been supported by INFN and partially by the INTAS grant Open Call 2000, Project No. 110.

## Appendix. Evaluation of the integral $`d^3x𝒦(𝐱)`$.

Setting, as everywhere else in this paper, $`m_W`$ for an UV cutoff and using the notations for $`a`$, $`c`$, $`[1/c]`$, and the incomplete Gamma-function introduced in the main text, we have for the desired integral:

$$I=\frac{4\pi }{m_H^3}\underset{c}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑xx^2\left[\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{a\mathrm{e}^x}{x}\right)1\right]=\frac{4\pi }{m_H^3}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{a^n}{n!}\underset{c}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x\mathrm{e}^{nx}x^{2n}=$$

$$=\frac{4\pi }{m_H^3}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{a^n}{n!}n^{n3}\mathrm{\Gamma }(3n,cn)\frac{4\pi }{m_H^3}\left[\underset{n=1}{\overset{[1/c]}{}}\frac{a^n}{n!}n^{n3}\mathrm{\Gamma }(3n,cn)+c^2\underset{[1/c]+1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{a}{c}\right)^n\frac{\mathrm{e}^{cn}}{nn!}\right].$$
$`(A.1)`$
Clearly, in the derivation of the last equality, we have used the asymptotics of the incomplete Gamma-function at large values of its second argument: $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(3n,cn)(cn)^{2n}\mathrm{e}^{cn}`$. The last sum in eq. (A.1) can further be rewritten as $`\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{n=1}{\overset{[1/c]}{}}`$, and we obtain:

$$I\frac{4\pi }{m_H^3}\left\{\underset{n=1}{\overset{[1/c]}{}}\frac{a^n}{nn!}\left[n^{n2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(3n,cn)c^{2n}\mathrm{e}^{cn}\right]+c^2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{a}{c}\right)^n\frac{\mathrm{e}^{cn}}{nn!}\right\}.$$
$`(A.2)`$
Note that the last sum here is equal to $`\mathrm{Ei}\left(\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c\right)\gamma \mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c\right)`$, where $`\gamma 0.577`$ is the Euler constant, and Ei denotes the integral exponential function. However, in the interesting to us case $`c1`$, $`a1`$, such a representation of that sum does not help when one tries to express it explicitly in terms of $`a`$ and $`c`$. Instead, it is useful to rewrite it as follows:

$$\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑t\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{a}{c}\right)^n\frac{\mathrm{e}^{(c+t)n}}{n!}=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑t\left\{\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^{(c+t)}\right]1\right\}=\underset{0}{\overset{\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c}{}}\frac{dz}{z}\left(\mathrm{e}^z1\right),$$
$`(A.3)`$
where $`z\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^{(c+t)}`$. Integrating by parts we have at $`\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c1`$:

$$(A.3)\left[\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c\right)1\right]\left(\mathrm{ln}\frac{a}{c}c\right)\left(\mathrm{e}^z|_0^1\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑z\mathrm{ln}z+\mathrm{ln}z|_1^{\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c}\underset{1}{\overset{\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c}{}}𝑑z\mathrm{e}^z\right)$$

$$\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{a}{c}\mathrm{e}^c\right)\left(1\frac{c}{a}\mathrm{e}^c\right)+(\mathrm{e}1)\mathrm{ln}a,$$

where in the derivation of the last equality we have kept the terms leading in $`a`$ and $`(a/c)`$. Together with the first sum standing on the r.h.s. of eq. (A.2) this finally yields eq. (6) of the main text.


format: text

text:
# DMRG studies of the effect of constraint release on the viscosity of polymer melts

## I Introduction

The viscosity of polymer melts has been investigated intensively.ferry  The models for describing this behavior, however, are not yet satisfying. Experiments show that the viscosity $`\eta `$ scales like $`M^{3.3\pm 0.1}`$, where $`M`$ is the molecular weight. This behavior is valid for several decades of the molecular weight. An early approach was the reptation model by de Gennes degennes  which yields $`\eta M^3`$ in the limit of infinitely long polymers. For short polymers Doidoiedwards  calculated the viscosity by taking tube length fluctuations into account and found a region of $`M`$ where the scaling is of the correct size – but this region appears to be much too small. A discrete model for reptation which includes tube length fluctuations is the Rubinstein–Duke (RD) model.rubinstein ; duke  Recently it was shown carlon  that this model does not only provide a region where a scaling of $`M^{3.3\pm 0.1}`$ can be found, as already shown by Rubinstein, rubinstein  but also that this model shows a crossover to the reptation exponent 3. But again the mass region where the correct exponent is valid does not exceed one order of magnitude. In this paper we extend the RD model in order to investigate whether constraint release (CR) broadens that region. While good models for the non–linear regime of viscosity can be constructed by using CR, hua ; likhtman  there was only little success in the linear regime.rotstein

## II theory

### II.1 RD model

In order to investigate the role of tube length fluctuations in reptation theory Rubinstein introduced a discrete “repton” model which allows the description of three–dimensional reptation dynamics by a one–dimensional lattice gas.rubinstein  Duke generalized the model to the case that an external electric field acts on a charged polymerduke  which allows a good description of the diffusion constant in gel electrophorese experiments.euroschuetz  However, also in the absence of a field the generalization by Duke is useful in so far as it provides a reference axis along which the displacement of the polymer chain as a whole can be monitored. This makes it possible to calculate the diffusion coefficient and the viscosity from the model, without resorting to independent hypotheses.
Rubinstein assumes that the constraints of the other polymers divide space into cells which form a $`d`$–dimensional regular cubic lattice. The polymer occupies a series of adjacent cells, the “primitive path”. It is not possible for the polymer to traverse the edges of the cells (in two dimensions: the lattice points) so that only the ends of the polymer can enter new cells. The polymer is divided into segments whose length is of the order of the lattice constant, the number of segments is proportional to the length of the polymer or the molecular weight. The orientation of the lattice is introduced by Duke in a way that the electric field is diagonal to the lattice, i.e. in three dimensions in the (111)–direction.
A segment – called a “repton” – is allowed to jump into an adjacent cell according to the following rules:

1. The reptons in the bulk are only allowed to jump along the primitive path.
2. No cell in the interior of the primitive path may be left empty.
3. The ends move freely insofar rule 2 is respected. If an end repton occupies the cell alone, it can only retract in the cell of the adjacent repton. If the adjacent repton is in the same cell, the end repton may enter any of the $`2d`$ surrounding cells. Reptons in the bulk jump with the same probability as reptons at the end into occupied cells.

Rule 1 ensures that the polymer does not traverse the edges of the cells. Rule 2 is motivated by the fact that the segments are of the size of the lattice constant. Finally rule 3 reflects the fact that there are more free adjacent cells for an end repton than occupied ones. If one considers a field $`F0`$ the ratio of the probabilities to jump in respectively against the direction of the field is proportional to the Boltzmann weight. In the following we will only focus on the case without field, we only need the reference axis.
As the shape of the primitive path is not affected by the movement of the polymer and only the ends are created or annihilated this model can be mapped onto one dimension. To this end a particle is assigned to each bond between reptons; starting on one end, a bond into the direction of the field is identified with an $`A`$–particle, against the field with a $`B`$–particle and finally a bond without change of potential, i.e. a bond between two reptons in one cell, by a vacancy $`\mathrm{}`$ (Fig. 1).111In the Rubinstein model only two cases are distinguished; a bond between two cells is identified by a particle and a bond within a cell is identified by a vacancy.

These particles are residing on a chain whose number of sites $`N`$ is the number of bonds, thus the number of reptons minus one. As for each site three states are possible this model can be identified with a “quantum” spin–one chain.schuetz ; barkema  We define

$$A\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\\ 0\end{array}\right),\mathrm{}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\\ 0\end{array}\right),B\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 0\\ 1\end{array}\right).$$

We label this set of states with $`X=\{A,\mathrm{},B\}`$. A state of a chain of length $`N`$ can be considered as an element $`|\eta `$ of the tensor base $`𝐗=X^N`$; $`|\eta `$ is constructed by the tensor product of the three component vectors for the individual sites.
The dynamics of this one dimensional model is:

1. $`A`$–particles may exchange with vacancies $`\mathrm{}`$: $`A\mathrm{}\mathrm{}A`$.
2. $`B`$–particles may exchange with vacancies $`\mathrm{}`$: $`B\mathrm{}\mathrm{}B`$.
3. $`A`$–particles may not exchange with $`B`$–particles.

By these rules it is guaranteed that the shape of the primitive path is conserved. The next rules define the boundary dynamics:

1. At the ends of the chain $`A`$–particles may be annihilated:
$`A\mathrm{}`$.
2. At the ends of the chain $`B`$–particles may be annihilated:
$`B\mathrm{}`$.
3. At the ends of the chain $`A`$–particles may be created: $`\mathrm{}A`$.
4. At the ends of the chain $`B`$–particles may be created: $`\mathrm{}B`$.

The processes 1, 2, 4 and 5 take place with the same probability; the processes 6 and 7 are $`d`$–times more probable.
In this way a stochastic interacting particle system on a one dimensional chain has been defined. As the transitions are independent of the previous history this process is Markovian.

### II.2 Quantum Hamiltonian

A convenient way to describe the process mathematically is the quantum Hamiltonian formalism which we will present here shortly, for details see Ref. schuetz, .
The probability to be in state $`|\eta `$ at time $`t`$ is labeled by $`P_\eta (t)`$. These probabilities of the individual states can be combined to a vector: $`|P(t)=P_\eta (t)|\eta `$. Due to the conservation of probability the entries of the vector $`|P(t)`$ sum up to 1 at any time $`t`$. With this definition the master equation can be written as:

$$\frac{d}{dt}|P(t)=H|P(t),$$
(1)
with the stochastic generator

$$H=\underset{\eta }{}\underset{\eta ^{}\eta }{}w_{\eta ^{}\eta }|\eta \eta ^{}|+\underset{\eta }{}\underset{\eta ^{}\eta }{}w_{\eta \eta ^{}}|\eta \eta |.$$
(2)
Here $`w_{\eta ^{}\eta }`$ is the transition probability from state $`|\eta ^{}`$ to $`|\eta `$. In other words the off diagonal elements of the matrix $`H`$ are the negative transition rates between the respective states and the diagonal elements are the sum of the rates leading away from the respective state.
The creation operators $`a^{}`$ and $`b^{}`$ are defined by $`a^{}\mathrm{}=A`$ and $`b^{}\mathrm{}=B`$, acting on any other state yields zero. The annihilation operators $`a`$ and $`b`$ are defined by $`aA=\mathrm{}`$ and $`bB=\mathrm{}`$, again acting on any other state yields again zero. Finally we define the number operators $`n^A=a^{}a`$, $`n^B=b^{}b`$ and $`n^{\mathrm{}}=1n^An^B`$. By these definitions the stochastic generator $`H`$ of the RD model reads: barkema

$$H=b_1(d)+b_N(d)+\underset{n=1}{\overset{N1}{}}u_n$$
(3)
with

$`b_n(d)`$ $`=`$ $`d\left[n_n^{\mathrm{}}a_n^{}+n_n^{\mathrm{}}b_n^{}\right]+n_n^Aa_n+n_n^Bb_n`$
$`u_n`$ $`=`$ $`n_n^An_{n+1}^{\mathrm{}}a_na_{n+1}^{}+n_n^Bn_{n+1}^{\mathrm{}}b_nb_{n+1}^{}`$
$`+`$ $`n_n^{\mathrm{}}n_{n+1}^Aa_n^{}a_{n+1}+n_n^{\mathrm{}}n_{n+1}^Bb_n^{}b_{n+1}.`$
Again, $`d`$ labels the lattice dimension. We have chosen the time scale such that the hopping rate in the bulk equals unity.

### II.3 Calculation of the viscosity

The viscosity is proportional to the longest relaxation time of the stochastic generator $`H`$ which is the inverse energy gap.doiedwards  Due to the conservation of probability the ground state of a stochastic generator has the eigenvalue zero, so that we only need to calculate the first eigenvalue.
A very efficient algorithm to calculate the lowest excitations of quantum spin chains is the density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) algorithm.white ; noack  For the standard RD model the usefulness of this algorithm has been demonstrated,carlon  so that we employ this algorithm as well for the modifications of the RD model, to be introduced in what follows.
The Hilbert space of the spin chain grows exponentially with the number sites $`N`$; the number of states is $`3^N`$, so that for $`N=50`$ — the maximum number of sites considered in our calculations — the number of states is of the order $`10^{23}`$. By this it is reasonable to project all quantities onto a subspace consisting of the most important states. The difficulty is to find out which states are the “most important”. The DMRG algorithm is a method which provides a choice of states which is optimal in terms of a maximum of the probability with which the states contribute to the target state.white  This probability is gained by diagonalizing the density matrix. As the diagonalization of the density matrix for the whole system would be as laborious as the direct diagonalization of the hamiltonian the system is build up stepwise. Starting with a small system (e.g. 2 states) one adds iteratively two states until the system has reached the searched size. In each step the Hilbert space is reduced to the subspace of the most probable states, so that the system size increases while the dimension of the matrices remain constant.

### II.4 Constraint release

The RD model as well as standard reptation theory is based on the assumption that the polymer moves in a fixed network formed by the surrounding polymers. This assumption is at best justifiable for a single polymer immersed in a gel. But for polymer melts, for which the viscosity is measured, it should be taken into account that the surrounding polymers reptate themselves. In terms of the Rubinstein model this means that the lattice itself is subjected to fluctuations.
We consider the following model of lattice fluctuations: Imagine that a constraining polymer moves so far that the constraint for the investigated polymer is released so that it can move freely in this region. After a short time the constraining polymer returns or an other polymer has taken its place so that the free movement in this region is again prevented. The lattice has regained its originally structure but the primitive path may have changed in the bulk (Fig. 2). This is what we call a “constraint release” (CR) event.

A straightforward implementation of this mechanism is shown in Fig. 3. The turning of bend of the primitive path equals to the permutation of an $`AB`$–pair. At the ends of the path $`A`$–particles can be transformed into $`B`$–particles and vice versa which corresponds to a CR event at the ends.

To construct the extended Hamiltonian which takes these mechanisms into account we introduce an operator which transforms $`B`$–particles into $`A`$–particles:

$$c=a^{}b;c^{}=b^{}a,$$
(4)
the adjoint operator effects the reversed process. The corresponding diagonal elements are build up by $`n^B`$ respectively $`n^A`$. Now the new Hamiltonian can be written as:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill H^{CR}& =H+g_1(\alpha )+g_N(\alpha )+\underset{n=1}{\overset{N1}{}}v_n(\alpha )\hfill \\ \hfill g_n(\alpha )& =\alpha \left[n_n^Bc_n+n_n^Ac_n^{}\right]\hfill \\ \hfill v_n(\alpha )& =\alpha \left[n_n^Bn_{n+1}^Ac_nc_{n+1}^{}+n_n^An_{n+1}^Bc_n^{}c_{n+1}\right],\hfill \end{array}$$
(5)
with the Hamiltonian $`H`$ from Eq. (3), and $`\alpha `$ labels the rate for the CR process.

## III Calculations and results

In order to investigate the dependence of the viscosity on the CR rate $`\alpha `$ we performed DMRG calculations for the rates $`1/N`$, $`1/N^2`$ and $`1/N^3`$. The choice of these rates is based on two estimates. The first is very simple: A constraint is released when an end repton retracts back into the tube. The probability that the constraint is exerted by an end repton is $`2/N`$, provided that the probability for the presence of a segment is equally distributed. The hopping of a single repton is a process of rate one and so we find that the rate for a CR is of the order $`1/N`$. For the second estimate we assume that a CR is caused by a tube renewal. Later in this paper we will show the calculation of this estimate within the Rouse model which leads to the result that the rate $`\alpha `$ is proportional to the inverse relaxation time and scales therefore with $`1/N^3`$.
The viscosity which was calculated with these rates for the mechanism of AB exchange is plotted in Fig. 4. It can bee seen that the viscosity decreases with increasing CR rate which is reasonable because the relaxation of the tube is accelerated by this process. For the investigation of the scaling it is more useful to plot the local slope or the effective exponent

$$z_N=\frac{\text{ln}\tau _{N+1}\text{ln}\tau _{N1}}{\text{ln}(N+1)\text{ln}(N1)},$$
(6)
against $`1/\sqrt{N}`$ as introduced in Ref. carlon, . The choice of the abscissa is motivated by the formula of Doidoiedwards  which predicts a correction to the $`N^3`$–scaling in the order of $`1/\sqrt{N}`$ by taking tube length fluctuations into account. It should be mentioned that in this paper $`N`$ labels the number of segments which is proportional to the length of the polymer while in Ref. carlon,  it labels the number of reptons which is the number of segments plus one. Surprisingly the latter interpretation shows a better agreement with the Doi formula while the former shows a better agreement with the experiments since the range where $`z_N3.3\pm 0.1`$ is much broader.

The influence on the effective exponent $`z_N`$ is plotted in Fig. 5. The influence is non–monotonic in $`\alpha `$: While the rate $`1/N`$ causes an obvious shift down in comparison with the data without CR, the data of rate $`1/N^2`$ is located above the curve without CR. The data of rate $`1/N^3`$ is also located above the curve without CR but at a smaller distance.
We remark that from a theoretical point of view also the rate $`\alpha =1`$ is interesting. If $`A`$– and $`B`$–particles exchange with the same rate as particles with vacancies, the particle can diffuse freely, as they feel no longer restrictions. This means that the reptation model transforms into the Rouse model as the tube can change its form freely. This is why rate $`\alpha =1`$ represents a possibility to verify the model: The relaxation time should scale in the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$ as $`N^2`$. But the DMRG calculation of the effective exponent with this rate yields a diverging curve. On the other hand, if the second excitation is considered, one can see that it scales as $`N^2`$. This suggests that the first excitation is caused by an other relaxation mechanism and the second excitation yields the desired time, which scales with the expected exponent whereby the transition to Rouse dynamics is verified.

The bounds $`1/N>\alpha >1/N^3`$ are rather weak and a self–consistent approach is needed for determining the appropriate scaling of the rate $`\alpha `$. As a CR event is caused by the tube renewal of a polymer, this process is not independent of the relaxation time. The relaxation time itself is affected by the CR rate. So the rate is physical, if the relaxation time, which is calculated using this rate, yields the same CR rate.

To calculate the self consistent rate $`\alpha _{SC}`$ we proceed as follows: The dependence of the CR rate on the relaxation time $`\alpha (\tau )`$ is estimated by an analytical calculation using Rouse dynamics. The DMRG calculation with the rates mentioned above yields directly the dependence of the relaxation time on the CR rate $`\tau _N(\alpha )`$ for the respective chain lengths. The inverse function of $`\alpha (\tau )`$, $`\tau (\alpha )`$, is compared with $`\tau _N(\alpha )`$: The intersection of the curves yields the self consistent rate $`\alpha _{SC}`$ in first approximation.
First we calculate the dependence of the CR rate on the relaxation time. The polymer whose relaxation time we want to calculate finally is hindered in his free movement by an other polymer. The position which exerts the constraint may have the distance $`s`$ from one end of the constraining polymer. So, the constraint is released when the polymer moves either the distance $`s`$ into the one direction or the distance $`Ns`$ into the other direction, where $`N`$ labels the length of the polymer. In Ref. doiedwards,  an expression is presented which provides the distribution $`\psi (s,t)`$ of the probability that the tube segment $`s`$ was at time $`t`$ not yet reached by the ends:

$$\psi (s,t)=\underset{p,odd}{}\frac{4}{p\pi }\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{p\pi s}{N}\right)e^{p^2t/\tau },$$
(7)
with the relaxation time $`\tau `$. The calculation of this formula bases on the assumption that the polymer diffuses in between the tube due to Rouse dynamics. The complementary probability distribution $`\varphi (s,t)`$, which indicates the probability that at time $`t`$ the segment $`s`$ is already reached by one of the ends is then

$$\varphi (s,t)=1\psi (s,t).$$
(8)
The derivate with respect to time

$$f(s,t)=\frac{\varphi }{t}$$
(9)
is the first passage time density, i.e. the probability per time that the segment $`s`$ is reached by one end just at time $`t`$. Now we can specify the mean first passage time

$$\overline{\mu }(s)=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑ttf(s,t)$$
(10)
which indicates how long it takes in average until segment $`s`$ is reached by an end. Finally we average over all $`s`$ provided that each segment builds up an entanglement with the same probability

$$\mu =\frac{1}{N}_0^N𝑑s\overline{\mu }(s).$$
(11)
This is the desired time: In average the release of a constraint will take the time $`\mu `$, the CR process takes place with rate $`\alpha =\mu ^1`$. The calculation of the integrals is elementary mathematics and we only show the result:

$$\mu =0.822\tau \alpha =1.22\tau ^1.$$
(12)
This calculation is based on a continuous description of the polymer. However, we are considering a lattice model of reptation so that boundary effects might not be taken into account correctly by the continuum expression (11). Therefore we performed the above calculation as well for the discrete case. As the result for the discrete case converges quickly to the continuous case but consists of only numerical evaluable series, we restricted ourselves to the continuous case here. There is an error of less than 2 per cent for as little as 10 reptons.

Fig. 6 shows the curve $`\tau (\alpha )=1.22\alpha ^1`$ and the relaxation times for the CR rates $`\alpha =1/N^3`$ and $`1/N^2`$ exemplified for $`N=30`$, the data point for $`\alpha =1/N`$ is out of the plotted range. In order to investigate the dependence of the relaxation time on the CR rate we interpolated the data points linearly by fitting them with splines. The data points are is well approximated by this interpolation in the region where the intersection point is expected. In this way we determined the self consistent relaxation times and rates for the lengths $`N=8\mathrm{}50`$. As the lengths $`N=4`$ and $`N=6`$ do not lead to reasonable intersection points we did not take them into account. To verify the self consistence a new DMRG run was done with a fit of the determined rates; as can be seen in Fig. 7 the resulting relaxation times coincide well with the ones determined by the self consistence condition, so that the linear interpolation represents a sufficiently good approximation.
In Fig. 8 the effective exponent is shown for the self consistent relaxation times and for the DMRG calculation. The exponent is shifted to higher values in the region of small $`N`$, but a broadening of the region where $`z_N3.3`$ could not be observed.

The Rubinstein model is not microscopic and hence there is some freedom in implementing microscopic process such as CR. A different mechanismeuroschuetz  leads to the creation and annihilation of particles in the bulk. We performed similar analysis for this mechanism with qualitatively similar results.diploma
We conclude that Rouse–based calculations do not lead to a proper description of crossover behavior in the viscosity of polymer melts when Rouse theory is used as a self consistency input in the mesoscopic and generally quite successful Rubinstein model for reptation. We cannot rule out that a fully self–consistent implementation of CR (without Rouse assumption) leads to a crossover regime closer to empirical evidence, but the broad range of CR rates studied here suggests that bulk shape fluctuations of the tube which result from constraint release do not significantly broaden the crossover range of the viscosity.


text:
# Dewetting of thin polymer films near the glass transition

(28th of january, 2002)

## Abstract

Dewetting of ultra-thin polymer films near the glass transition exhibits unexpected front morphologies \[G. Reiter, Phys. Rev. Lett., 87, 186101 (2001)\]. We present here the first theoretical attempt to understand these features, focusing on the shear-thinning behaviour of these films. We analyse the profile of the dewetting film, and characterize the time evolution of the dry region radius, $`R_d(t)`$, and of the rim height, $`h_m(t)`$. After a transient time depending on the initial thickness, $`h_m(t)`$ grows like $`\sqrt{t}`$ while $`R_d(t)`$ increases like $`\mathrm{exp}(\sqrt{t})`$. Different regimes of growth are expected, depending on the initial film thickness and experimental time range.

preprint: APS/123-QED

Thin liquids films are ubiquitous entities in science and technology. In engineering, for instance, they serve to protect surfaces, and applications arise in paints, adhesives and membranes oron . Thin liquids films display a variety of interesting dynamics phenomena and have therefore been the focus of many experimental and theoretical studies revues . Nearly half a century ago, Taylor taylor  and Culick culick  analyzed the growth of a circular hole in a thin liquid sheet dupre . By balancing surface tension forces against inertia, they found that the rim of liquid at the edge of the films retracts at a constant velocity, a prediction first checked experimentally by Mc Entee and Mysels mysels . The precise shape of the rim was later analysed by Keller et al. keller ; koplik  who showed that it is a cylindrical cap expanding in time like $`\sqrt{t}`$. Recent experiments by Debrégeas and collaborators debregeas  on thin suspended films of very viscous liquids revealed unexpected features: (a) First, the retraction velocity grows exponentially with time (with a characteristic time scale $`\tau _i=h_i\eta /|S|`$, where $`h_i`$, $`\eta `$ and $`S`$ are respectively the initial film thickness, the viscosity and the spreading coefficient rem1 ), (b) second, the liquid is not collected into a rim and the film remains flat through the retraction. According to these authors, the uniform thickening of the retracting film was a consequence of its viscoelasticity, which permits an elastic propagation into the film of the surface tension forces acting on the edge. Solving numerically the Navier-Stokes equations for long wavelength modulations of the film, Brenner and Gueyffier brenner  showed, however, that the absence of rim can also result from a purely viscous effect.

Very recently reiter , Reiter studied the dewetting of ultrathin (i.e. thinner than the coil size), almost glassy polystyrene (PS) films deposited onto silicon wafers coated with a polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) monolayer. He found that a highly asymmetric rim, with an extremely steep side towards the interior of the hole and a much slower decay on the rear side, builds up progressively herminghaus . In this Letter we present the first theoretical attempt to understand these new features. Figure 1 shows the film geometry.

In order to characterise the rheologic properties of the film, we introduce the stress tensor $`\sigma _{ij}=p\delta _{ij}+\sigma _{ij}^m`$, where $`p`$ is the pressure and $`\sigma _{ij}^m`$ represents the effects of internal friction. We relate $`\sigma _{ij}^m`$ to the strain rate tensor $`\dot{\gamma }_{ij}`$ by a constitutive law of the form:

$$\sigma ^m(\dot{\gamma })=\sigma _0\mathrm{\Phi }(\dot{\gamma }\tau )$$
(1)
where $`\sigma _0`$ and $`\tau `$ are material constants, and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a generic function. For a purely viscous liquid, the function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is linear, whereas for polymers, just above $`T_g`$, it can be shown within the framework of the free-volume model aparaitre  that $`\sigma ^m`$ is expected to vary logarithmically with $`\dot{\gamma }`$ as dyre :

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\dot{\gamma }\tau )=\mathrm{ln}(1+\dot{\gamma }\tau )$$
(2)
At low strain-rates ($`\dot{\gamma }\tau <1`$), this law displays a viscous-type behaviour ($`\sigma ^m\eta _0\dot{\gamma }`$, with a zero-shear viscosity $`\eta _0=\sigma _0\tau `$), while for large values of $`\dot{\gamma }\tau `$, $`\sigma ^m`$ reaches an almost constant value (shear-thinning behaviour).

Assuming the fluid to be incompressible, mass conservation leads to:

$$\frac{1}{h(r,t)}(\frac{h(r,t)}{t}+\frac{r\beta (r,t)}{\tau }\frac{h(r,t)}{r})=\frac{\alpha (r,t)\beta (r,t)}{\tau }$$
(3)
Equation 3 involves two unknown functions $`\alpha (r,t)`$ and $`\beta (r,t)`$, that are positive, dimensionless forms of the strain-rate components $`\dot{\gamma }_{rr}`$ and $`\dot{\gamma }_{\varphi \varphi }`$:

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}\alpha =\tau \dot{\gamma }_{rr}=\tau \frac{v}{r}\hfill & \\ \beta =\tau \dot{\gamma }_{\varphi \varphi }=\tau \frac{v}{r}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(4)
We thus need two additional equations to determine $`h(r,t)`$. First, note that the following partial differential equation can be directly derived from Eq.4:

$$\frac{\beta }{r}=\frac{\beta +\alpha }{r}$$
(5)
Neglecting the inertial term, conservation of momentum (projected on the radial direction christensen ) leads to:

$$\frac{\sigma _{rr}}{r}+\frac{\sigma _{rr}\sigma _{\varphi \varphi }}{r}=0$$
(6)
It can be shown that Eqs. 5 and 6, along with the free-surface boundary condition (i.e. $`\sigma _{zz}=0`$ at the contact with ambient atmosphere rem4 ), allow one to express the strain rate $`\alpha `$ as a function of $`\beta `$ only : $`\alpha =F(\beta )`$. Substitution of the constitutive law 1 in Eq.6 then leads to the following differential equation for $`F`$:

$$\frac{\text{d}[\mathrm{\Phi }(F(\beta ))\mathrm{\Phi }(F(\beta )\beta )]}{\text{d}\beta }=\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }(F(\beta ))\mathrm{\Phi }(\beta )}{F(\beta )+\beta }$$
(7)
which has to be solved along with the condition $`F(0)=0`$ (far away from the perturbed central region, the strain rates must decrease to zero).

In order to solve Eq.3, we should supply it with initial and boundary conditions. Our initial profile is assumed to be uniform, with a thickness $`h_i`$, except in a bored region ranging from $`r=0`$ to $`r=R_0`$ (as shown in fig.1). $`R_0`$ is our characteristic radial length used thereafter to make $`r`$ dimensionless:

$$h(r,t=0)=\{\begin{array}{cc}h_i\hfill & \text{if }rR_0=1\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise}\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
We do not consider here the origin of the initial dewetting process: experimentally, it is found that a thick PS film on a silicon substrate is metastable and dewets via nucleation and growth of dry patches redon , while thinner films ($`h_i<`$100 nm) are unstable and dewet by spinodal decomposition gunterprec . In his latest experiments on ultra-thin films reiter , Reiter characterized the early stage of the dewetting process by the formation and coalescence of little holes, with the displaced material uniformly distributed between the holes, without visible rims. Our initial time $`t=0`$ might correspond to the end of this preliminary process.

Equation 3 applies outside the dewetted region ($`R_d(t)r<\mathrm{}`$). At the edge of the rim ($`r=R_d(t)`$), the rim height, $`h_m(t)`$, can be determined by taking into account capillary forces. The applied force on the rim, pushing the film away the dry area, must be balanced by the internal radial stress: $`|S|=|\sigma _{rr}|h_m(t)`$. Assuming the lateral extension of the film to be large enough, the film thickness must reach $`h_i`$ far from the dry region: $`lim_r\mathrm{}h(r,t)=h_i(t)`$. The complete resolution of our set of equations 3-5-7 can be achieved using a method of characteristics aparaitre . Thereafter, all thicknesses will be made dimensionless by normalizing with a characteristic length $`h^{}|S|/\sigma _0`$ (for Reiter’s experimental conditions, we estimate $`h^{}`$ to be of the order of 500 Å).

Note first that for a purely viscous liquid ($`\mathrm{\Phi }(\dot{\gamma }\tau )=\dot{\gamma }\tau `$), our model leads to a constant and uniform thickness for the film, with an exponential growth of the dry radius:

$$R_d(t)=R_0e^{\frac{|S|t}{\sigma _0\tau h_i}}=R_0e^{\frac{t}{\tau _i}}$$
(9)
This is in complete agreement with the experimental results of Debrégeas et al. for the dewetting of suspended polymer films debregeas  and supported films debregeasmacromol .

If we take into account the shear-thinning behavior of the polymer film ($`\sigma ^m(\dot{\gamma })=\sigma _0\mathrm{ln}(1+\dot{\gamma }\tau )`$) the dewetting front is quite different. An example of profile obtained for $`h_i=0.1h^{}`$ is shown in Fig.2. This profile is characterized by a highly asymmetric shape for the rim. There is a striking similarity between such a profile and those observed by Reiter for ultra-thin films reiter . On fig.3 we present the time evolution of this profile (for $`t`$ ranging from $`t=0`$ to $`t=5.10^2\tau `$, with a time step of $`10^2\tau `$). The velocity field $`v(r,t)`$ is found to be almost proportional to $`1/r`$ at any time for thick profiles ($`h_ih^{}`$), similar to the long range radial plug flow observed by Debrégeas et al. debregeas . We now focus on two natural parameters characterizing the film profile: the dry radius $`R_d(t)`$ and rim height $`h_m(t)`$.

In order to discuss the time dependence of the rim height, we need to compare $`h_i`$ with the characteristic thickness $`h^{}`$ (in Fig. 5 we present our results for different initial thicknesses). For very thin profiles ($`h_ih^{}`$), the increase of rim height is initially very fast, whereas for thicker films ($`h_ih^{}`$), $`h_m(t)`$ is nearly constant during a long period of time, before growing faster. For the sake of conciseness, we will mainly focus on the case of thick films, for which simple scaling laws can be analytically obtained. As shown in Fig.5, for $`h_i=100h^{}`$ two different time regimes can be distinguished: at the beginning of hole formation, $`h_m`$ is nearly constant and equals its initial value $`h_i`$. We have checked numerically (cf. Fig.5 b) that the anticipated analytical behaviour

$$h_m(t)\underset{tt_0}{}\frac{h^{}}{2}\sqrt{t/\tau }$$
(10)
is obeyed after a crossover time $`t_0\tau (\frac{h_i}{h^{}})^2`$

In Fig.4, we present the time evolution of $`R_d`$ for different initial thicknesses $`h_i`$. It is physically understandable that $`R_d`$, at a given time $`t`$, is larger for thinner films : for a given applied force $`|S|`$ per unit length, the thicker the film, the more the material to be displaced and the lower the dewetting velocity. Fig.4 shows that the following anticipated analytical behaviour is obeyed for $`tt_0`$:

$$R_d(t)\underset{tt_0}{}R_{\mathrm{}}e^{4\sqrt{t/\tau }}$$
(11)
Note that the coefficient $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ strongly depends on $`h_i`$. During the early stage ($`tt_0`$), the strain rates at the rim are constant and small, as a consequence of the constant large thickness. In this case, the rheological law of the film is viscous-type and the dry radius increases exponentially, as for the case previously discussed (see Eq.9). The range of thicknesses experimentally studied by Debrégeas et al. (5 to 250 $`\mu `$m) covers the domain $`h_ih^{}`$. As the corresponding crossover time is very large ($`t_0\tau `$), these experiments only covered mainly the first regime $`tt_0`$ (this criterion $`h_ih^{}`$ is in fact a basic hypothesis of their “soft balloon” model rem5 ). The crossover to the exp($`\sqrt{t}`$) regime is a consequence of the non-linearity of rheological law 2.

The case $`h_ih^{}`$ will not be fully discussed here (cf. aparaitre ). Briefly, we can note on Fig.5 that a sharp rim grows very quickly (with an initial speed $`\dot{h}_mh_i\mathrm{exp}h^{}/2h_i`$) at short times. In this regime, $`h_m(t)`$ is well described by the integral equation:

$$_{\frac{h^{}}{2h_m(t)}}^{\frac{h^{}}{2h_i}}\frac{e^x}{x}\text{d}x\underset{t\tau }{}\frac{t}{\tau }$$
(12)
Later on, $`h_m`$ and $`R_d`$ reach the same laws of growth as in the case of thick films (Eqs.10 and 11).

In conclusion, our model accounts well for the exponential growth and the absence of rim characteristics of the dewetting regime observed by Debrégeas et al. for viscous polymer films. Taking into account the shear-thinning behaviour of the polymers near $`T_g`$ enables us to see the modifications induced by this particular rheology on the film morphology dalnoki . It appears from our results that the early stages of dewetting for a shear-thinning polymer film are mainly determined by the ratio of its initial thickness $`h_i`$ to a characteristic scale $`h^{}`$ (related to the driving force of the process, $`S`$, and the rheological response of the material, characterized by $`\sigma _0`$). In all cases, after a transient time depending on $`h_i`$, the rim height grows proportionally to $`\sqrt{t/\tau }`$ while the dry radius expands like $`\mathrm{exp}(4\sqrt{t/\tau })`$. The film profile exhibits a sharp, asymmetric rim similar to the one observed by Reiter in his latest experiments with ultrathin PS films. Work is now in progress to incorporate in our model the Laplace pressure (see rem4 ) which might lead to oscillatory dewetting fronts brenner ; herminghaus , and to evaluate the possible effects of chain entanglements. In the future, we aim to study the dewetting of thin polymer films below $`T_g`$, where the existence of a yield stress in the rheological response of the material may lead to new dewetting morphologies.

We wish to acknowledge fruitful discussions with A. Aradian, G. Debrégeas, and G. Reiter.


text:
# Parity Violating Measurements of Neutron Densities: Implications for Neutron Stars

## 1 Introduction

The size of a heavy nucleus is one of its most basic properties. However, because of a neutron skin of uncertain thickness, the size does not follow from measured charge radii and is relatively poorly known. For example, the root mean square neutron radius in 208Pb, $`R_n`$ is thought to be about 0.2 Fm larger then the proton radius $`R_p5.45`$ Fm. An accurate measurement of $`R_n`$ would provide the first clean observation of the neutron skin in a stable heavy nucleus. This is thought to be an important feature of all heavy nuclei.

Ground state charge densities have been determined from elastic electron scattering, see for example ref.. Because the densities are both accurate and model independent they have had a great and lasting impact on nuclear physics. They are, quite literally, our modern picture of the nucleus.

In this paper we discuss future parity violating measurements of neutron densities. These purely electro-weak experiments follow in the same tradition and can be both accurate and model independent. Neutron density measurements have implications for nuclear structure, atomic parity nonconservation (PNC) experiments, isovector interactions, the structure of neutron rich radioactive beams, and neutron rich matter in astrophysics. It is remarkable that a single measurement has so many applications in atomic, nuclear and astrophysics.

Donnelly, Dubach and Sick suggested that parity violating electron scattering can measure neutron densities. This is because the $`Z`$boson couples primarily to the neutron at low $`Q^2`$. Therefore one can deduce the weak-charge density and the closely related neutron density from measurements of the parity-violating asymmetry in polarized elastic scattering.

Of course the parity violating asymmetry is very small, of order a part per million. Therefore measurements were very difficult. However, a great deal of experimental progress has been made since the Donnelly et. al. suggestion, and since the early SLAC experiment . This includes the Bates 12C experiment, Mainz 9Be experiment , SAMPLE  and HAPPEX . The relative speed of the HAPPEX result and the very good helicity correlated beam properties of CEBAF show that very accurate parity violation measurements are possible. Parity violation is now an established and powerful tool.

It is important to test the Standard Model at low energies with atomic parity nonconservation (PNC), see for example the Colorado measurement in Cs . These experiments can be sensitive to new parity violating interactions such as additional heavy $`Z`$bosons. Furthermore, by comparing atomic PNC to higher $`Q^2`$ measurements, for example at the $`Z`$ pole, one can study the momentum dependence of Standard model radiative corrections. However, as the accuracy of atomic PNC experiments improves they will require increasingly precise information on neutron densities. This is because the parity violating interaction is proportional to the overlap between electrons and neutrons. In the future the most precise low energy Standard Model test may involve the combination of an atomic PNC measurement and parity violating electron scattering to constrain the neutron density.

There have been many measurements of neutron densities with strongly interacting probes such as pion or proton elastic scattering, see for example ref. . Unfortunately, all such measurements suffer from potentially serious theoretical systematic errors. As a result no hadronic measurement of neutron densities has been generally accepted by the field.

Relative measurements of isotope differences of neutron radii can be more accurate. See for example . Therefore one can use a single parity violating measurement of the neutron radius of 208Pb to “calibrate” hadronic probes. Then these hadronic probes can be used to measure neutron radii of many other stable and unstable nuclei. For example, (3He,T) measurements of neutron radii differences for Sn isotopes were based on measuring spin dipole strength and a spin dipole sum rule along with assuming a theoretical Hartree Fock radius for 120Sn .

Finally, there is an important complementarity between neutron radius measurements in a finite nucleus and measurements of the neutron radius of a neutron star. Both provide information on the equation of state (EOS) of dense matter. In a nucleus, $`R_n`$ is sensitive to the EOS at normal nuclear densities. The neutron star radius depends on the EOS at higher densities. In the near future, we expect a number of improving radius measurements for nearby isolated neutron stars such as Geminga  and RX J185635-3754 .

We now present general considerations for neutron density measurements, discusses possible theoretical corrections, outline an approved Jefferson Laboratory experiment on 208Pb and then relate this Pb measurement to ongoing measurements of neutron star radii.

## 2 General Considerations

In this section we illustrate how parity violating electron scattering measures the neutron density and discuss the effects of Coulomb distortions and other corrections. These corrections are either small or well known so the interpretation of a measurement is clean.

### 2.1 Born Approximation Asymmetry

The weak interaction can be isolated by measuring the parity-violating asymmetry in the cross section for the scattering of left (right) handed electrons. In Born approximation the parity-violating asymmetry is,

$$A_{LR}=\frac{G_FQ^2}{4\pi \alpha \sqrt{2}}\left[4\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W1+\frac{F_n(Q^2)}{F_p(Q^2)}\right],$$
(1)
with $`G_F`$ the Fermi constant and $`\theta _W`$ the weak mixing angle. The Fourier transform of the proton distribution is $`F_p(Q^2)`$, while that of the neutron distribution is $`F_n(Q^2)`$, and $`Q`$ is the momentum transfer. The asymmetry is proportional to $`G_FQ^2/\alpha `$ which is just the ratio of $`Z^0`$ to photon propagators. Since 1-4sin$`{}_{}{}^{2}\theta _{W}^{}`$ is small and $`F_p(Q^2)`$ is known we see that $`A_{LR}`$ directly measures $`F_n(Q^2)`$. Therefore, $`A_{LR}`$ provides a practical method to cleanly measure the neutron form factor and hence $`R_n`$.

### 2.2 Coulomb distortions

By far the largest known correction to the asymmetry comes from coulomb distortions. By coulomb distortions we mean repeated electromagnetic interactions with the nucleus remaining in its ground state. All of the $`Z`$ protons in a nucleus can contribute coherently so distortion corrections are expected to be of order $`Z\alpha /\pi `$. This is 20 % for 208Pb.

Distortion corrections have been accurately calculated in ref. . Here the Dirac equation was numerically solved for an electron moving in a coulomb and axial-vector weak potentials. From the phase shifts, all of the elastic scattering observables including the asymmetry can be calculated.

Other theoretical corrections from meson exchange currents, parity admixtures in the ground state, dispersion corrections, the neutron electric form factor, strange quarks, the dependence of the extracted radius on the surface shape, etc. are discussed in reference . These are all small. Therefore the interpretation of a parity violating measurement is very clean.

## 3 Parity Radius experiment

The Parity Radius Experiment (P-ReX) will measure the parity violating asymmetry for elastic electron scattering from 208Pb . This Jefferson Laboratory Hall A experiment will use 850 MeV electrons scattered at six degrees. The planned 3% accuracy in the approximately 0.7 parts per million asymmetry will allow one to deduce the neutron root mean square radius $`R_n`$ to 1% ($`\pm 0.05`$ Fm). The neutron radius $`R_n`$ is expected to be about 0 to 0.3 Fm larger then the proton radius $`R_p`$. Therefore PREX should cleanly resolve the neutron skin $`R_nR_p`$.

The target will be a thick foil, enriched in 208Pb, sandwiched between two thin diamond foils. The very high thermal conductivity of the diamond keeps the Pb from melting and allows a high beam current of order 100 microamps. Note, the thin diamond foils introduce only a few percent background. Furthermore, the asymmetry from 12C can be calculated with high accuracy so this background is not a problem for the interpretation of the experiment.

PREX requires some improvements in the helicity correlated beam properties and an improvement in the measurement of the absolute beam polarization in Hall A. This is presently of order 3% and needs to be improved to 1-2%. It should take about 30 days of beam time to get the 3% statistics.

## 4 Implications of the 208Pb neutron radius for neutron stars

It is an exciting time to study neutron stars. These gigantic atomic nuclei are more massive then the Sun and yet have a radius of only about 10 kilometers. New telescopes, operating at many different wave lengths, are finally turning these theoretical curiosities into detailed observable worlds. The structure of a neutron star depends only on the equation of state (EOS) of neutron rich matter together with the know equations of General Relativity. The equation of state gives the pressure as a function of (energy) density. Densities in neutron stars are comparable to, or greater, then the densities in atomic nuclei. The central density of a 1.4 solar mass neutron star is expected to be a few times greater then the saturation density of nuclear matter, $`\rho _00.16`$ nucleons per Fm3.

Likewise the neutron radius of a conventional atomic nucleus such as 208Pb also depends on the equation of state of neutron rich matter. Higher pressures lead to greater neutron radii and thicker neutron skins as neutrons are pushed out against surface tension. Indeed, Alex Brown finds a strong correlation between the pressure of neutron matter at $`\rho 0.1`$ Fm-3 and the neutron radius in 208Pb . This correlation is valid for many different nonrelativistic and relativistic effective interactions. The density $`\rho =0.1`$ Fm-3 is about 2/3 of $`\rho _0`$ and represents some average over the interior and surface density of the nucleus.

Therefore, the neutron radius in Pb has many implications for the structure of neutron stars and several other areas of astrophysics. The common unknown is the equation of state of neutron rich matter. Information on the EOS from a measurement of $`R_n`$ for 208Pb could be very important for astrophysics.

### 4.1 Neutron Skin versus Neutron Star Crust

The Pb radius constrains the EOS at normal densities $`0.1`$ Fm-3. Neutron stars are expected to undergo a phase transition near this density from a solid crust to a liquid interior. We have shown that the Pb radius is strongly correlated with the liquid to solid transition density . A high pressure for neutron rich matter more quickly favors the uniform liquid over the nonuniform solid. Therefore, a large neutron radius in Pb implies a low transition density for the crust. Thus, a measurement of the thickness of the neutron rich skin in Pb helps determine the thickness of the solid crust of a neutron star. We note that both the skin of a heavy nucleus and the crust of a neutron star are made of neutron rich matter at similar densities. Many neutron star observables such as glitches in the rotational period, gravitational waves from quadrupole deformations, and the surface temperature depend on the thickness of the crust. Adrian Cho has written a short popular article on using this pression measurement in Pb to learn about neutron star crusts .

### 4.2 Pb radius versus Neutron Star Radius

In general the radius of a neutron star $`R_{}`$ is related to the neutron radius in Pb $`R_n`$. A large $`R_n`$ implies a high pressure for the EOS of neutron rich matter and this same pressure supports a star against gravity. Therefore, a larger $`R_n`$ might imply a larger $`R_{}`$. However, the radius of a neutron star $`R_{}`$ depends on the EOS of neutron rich matter over a range of densities from near $`\rho _0`$ to higher densities. In contrast, $`R_n`$ only depends on the EOS at $`\rho _0`$ and lower densities. Thus, $`R_n`$ only constrains the low density EOS. Models with different high density behavior can have the same $`R_n`$ but predict different $`R_{}`$. Therefore, we find no unique relationship between $`R_{}`$ and $`R_n`$ .

One way to characterize the different information on the EOS contained in $`R_n`$ compared to $`R_{}`$ is to consider low mass neutron stars. Most, well measured, neutron stars have masses near 1.4 solar masses. These stars have central densities significantly above $`\rho _0`$. Instead, 0.5 Solar mass neutron stars are expected to have central densities only slightly greater then $`\rho _0`$. We find a sharp correlation between $`R_{}`$ for 0.5 solar mass neutron stars and $`R_n`$ . This is because, now, both $`R_{}`$ and $`R_n`$ depend on the EOS at similar densities.

Note, such low mass neutron stars probably don’t exist. This is because conventional stars with cores near 0.5 solar masses are not expected to collapse. Thus, $`R_n`$ contains unique information on the low density EOS that can not be obtained by measuring neutron star radii directly. Furthermore, measuring both $`R_n`$ in Pb and $`R_{}`$ for a neutron star 111That is probably near 1.4 solar masses. provides important information on the density dependence of the EOS.

For example, if $`R_n`$ is measured to be relatively large, this implies a stiff (high pressure) EOS at normal nuclear densities. If $`R_{}`$ is also measured to be relatively small, say near 10 km, this implies a soft (low pressure) high density EOS. This softening of the EOS with increasing density could be strong evidence for a phase transition of neutron rich matter to some exotic phase. Note, an exotic phase that increases the pressure would not be thermodynamicly favored. There is much speculation on possible high density exotic phases for neutron rich matter. Examples include: kaon condensation, strange quark matter, or color superconductivity.

Neutron stars provide essentially the only way to study cold very dense matter. Relativistic heavy ion collisions can reach high energy densities but not at low temperatures. Thus, if an exotic phase exits at high density it is very hard to find experimental evidence. This comparison of the EOS information from $`R_n`$ and $`R_{}`$ may be one of the few sharp signals. Therefore, it is important to measure both the neutron radius of a heavy nucleus $`R_n`$, and the radius of a neutron star $`R_{}`$.

### 4.3 Measurements of Neutron Star Radii

There are several ongoing measurements of the radius of neutron stars. Most of these are based on measuring the stars luminosity, distance and surface temperature $`T`$. If the star were a black body, the luminosity would be $`\sigma T^4`$ times the surface area. Thus, the surface area $`4\pi R_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ and effective radius $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ can be deduced. Corrections for non black body behavior can be made with model atmospheres.

Because of the curvature of space in the Star’s very strong gravitational field, the effective radius $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ is somewhat larger then the coordinate radius $`R_{}`$,

$$R_{\mathrm{}}=R_{}/(12GM/R_{})^{1/2},$$
(2)
where $`M`$ is the Star’s mass and $`G`$ is Newton’s constant. Some of the light from the far side of the star is bent by gravity and still reaches an observer. This makes the star appear larger. Note, the light is also gravitationally red shifted so that the actual surface temperature is about 30% higher then the apparent temperature deduced from the observed spectrum.

The Stony Brook group has fit the visible and X-ray spectrum of the isolated nearby neutron star RX J185635-3754 with a model Fe atmosphere . Their fit combined with a preliminary parallax distance to RX J185635 of 61 parsecs (about 180 light years) yields a very small radius of $`R_{}=6`$ km! This radius is smaller then that predicted by any present neutron matter EOS and seems unrealistic. However Kaplan et al.  have questioned the parallax distance. They reanalyze the same Hubble optical images and infer a larger distance. For their distance, $`R_{\mathrm{}}=15\pm 6`$ km. Note for a 1.4 solar mass star, $`R_{\mathrm{}}=15`$ km corresponds to $`R_{}13`$ km. This new value is fully consistent with many neutron matter EOSs. However, the error is still large.

Sanwal et al.  fit the X-ray spectrum of the well known Vela pulsar with a high energy power law, from the pulsar mechanism, and a thermal component from a magnetized hydrogen atmosphere. They deduce $`R_{\mathrm{}}=15.5\pm 1.5`$ km assuming a distance to Vela of 250 parsec. Finally Rutledge et al. analyze the X-ray spectra of a neutron star in the globular star cluster NGC 5139, for which the distance to the cluster is well known . Their preliminary result is $`R_{\mathrm{}}=14.3\pm 2.5`$ km.

In the near future, we should have better distance measurements to RX J185635 and better X-ray spectra. Also, there will be better measurements on other nearby isolated neutron stars such as Geminga, and more measurements of neutron stars in globular clusters. This will allow checks on neutron star radii measured for stars with different surface temperatures and magnetic field strengths. A reasonable near term goal is a number of neutron star radius measurements accurate to about one km.

## 5 Conclusion

With the advent of high quality electron beam facilities such as CEBAF, experiments for accurately measuring the weak density in nuclei through parity violating elastic electron scattering (PVES) are feasible. From parity violating asymmetry measurements, one can extract the neutron density of a heavy nucleus accurately and model independently. This is because the weak charge of a neutron is much larger then that of a proton. Therefore, the $`Z^0`$ boson couples primarily to neutrons (at low momentum transfers).

These neutron density measurements allow a direct test of mean field theories and other models of the size and shape of nuclei. They can have a fundamental and lasting impact on nuclear physics. Furthermore, PVES measurements have important implications for atomic parity nonconservation (PNC) experiments. Atomic PNC measures the overlap of atomic electrons with neutrons. High precsion PNC experiments will need accurate neutron densities. In the future, it may be possible to combine atomic PNC experiments and PVES to provide a precise test of the Standard Model at low energies.

The Parity Radius Experiment at Jefferson Laboratory aims to measure the neutron radius in 208Pb to 1% with parity violating elastic electrons scattering. This will provide unique information on the equation of state (EOS) of neutron rich matter at normal nuclear densities. The EOS describes how the pressure depends on the density. This information has many astrophysical implications.

The structure of a neutron star depends only on the EOS. There are many ongoing measurements of the radius of neutron stars. These are sensitive to the EOS at greater then nuclear densities. By comparing the EOS information from the 208Pb neutron radius measurement with that from neutron star measurements one can deduce the density dependence of the EOS. This allows one to search for a softening (lower pressure) of the high density EOS from a possible phase transition to an exotic phase for neutron rich matter. Possible phases include kaon condensates, strange quark matter and color superconductors.

## Acknowledgments

The work on parity violating measurements of neutron densities was done in collaboration with Robert Michaels, Steven Pollock and Paul Souder. We acknowledge financial support from DOE grants: DE-FG02-87ER40365 and DE-FG05-92ER40750.

## References


text:
# Final state interactions in 𝝎 photoproduction near threshold

## 1 Introduction

Vector meson production off nucleons near threshold attracts recent interests in connection with the so-called “missing resonance problem” . By studying various physical quantities of vector meson production one hopes to have information on the nucleon resonances especially which couple rather strongly to the vector-meson–nucleon channel. There have been recent progress to obtain such informations by studying the processes of vector meson photoproduction . Among light vector mesons, $`\omega `$ photoproduction is studied in more detail due to its simple isospin character .

In order to extract information on the nucleon resonances from vector meson production, it is essential to first understand the background production mechanisms . As the background non-resonant production amplitudes one considers the Pomeron exchange, one-boson exchange, and the nucleon pole terms. Then the gap between the theoretical predictions on the background production and the experimental data, e.g. in total and differential cross sections, are expected to be explained by the terms including nucleon resonances. After adjusting the resonance parameters, other physical quantities, especially polarization asymmetries, are predicted to have more conclusive evidence for the nucleon resonances and it has been shown that some polarization asymmetries are really sensitive to the presence of nucleon resonances because of different helicity structure of the production amplitudes.

However, in order to have more conclusive clues on the nucleon resonances, it is essential to understand the background non-resonant amplitudes in more detail. We can have lessons from the study on the non-resonant part of pion photoproduction and pion-nucleon scattering, which shows that the final state interactions are important to improve meson exchange models . Such dynamical studies are important not only in understanding the structure of the nucleon resonances but also for unitarity of the scattering amplitude. Therefore it is legitimate to improve the existing models by imposing unitarity condition.

Such investigations are, however, intricate and many informations are still unavailable to do a reliable model study. In this work, therefore, we study final state interactions in $`\omega `$ photoproduction as our first step to construct a dynamical model for vector meson photoproduction near threshold. Because of its complexity, we only consider some one-loop diagrams in this work that seem to be non-negligible in the production amplitude. In the next Section, we discuss the non-resonant amplitude at tree level and our method to compute the final state interactions for several selected intermediate channels. The preliminary numerical results are given in Sec. III with discussions.

## 2 Model

As the non-resonant production process for $`\omega `$ photoproduction at tree level, it is widely used to include the Pomeron exchange, $`\pi `$ and $`\eta `$ exchanges, and the nucleon pole terms as depicted in Fig. 1 .

However, it is well-known that the amplitudes obtained at tree level such as in Fig. 1 do not satisfy unitarity. For example, the soft Pomeron model of Donnachie and Landshoff  that has been used in analyzing $`\omega `$ photoproduction has intercept larger than $`1.0`$ and hence violates the Froissart-Martin bound  that is a consequence of unitarity and the partial wave expansion. Imposing the unitarity condition to the process has been emphasized in many respects . Unitarity condition is also crucial in developing dynamical models for pion photoproduction and pion-nucleon interactions . Therefore it would be necessary to construct a unitarized model for vector meson photoproduction near threshold to search for the “missing nucleon resonances” by, for example, solving the coupled-channel equations, which would require very complicated calculations. Before tackling to the unitarization of the amplitude directly, we first compute final state interactions by considering several selected intermediate channels. It is the purpose of this work to compute several one loop diagrams in $`\omega `$ photoproduction.

Following Refs. , what we consider is the diagram shown in Fig. 2, which defines the momenta of the interacting particles and their helicities/spins. Then the amplitude shown in Fig. 2 is written as

$$(\mathrm{FSI})_{BM}=𝑑𝐤^{}\frac{𝐪;\lambda _\omega m_p^{}|𝖵|𝐤^{};\lambda _Mm_p^{\prime \prime }𝐤^{};\lambda _Mm_p^{\prime \prime }|𝖡|𝐤\lambda _\gamma m_p}{WE_B(𝐤^{})E_M(𝐤^{})+i\epsilon },$$
(1)
after 3-dimension reduction, where $`E_{B,M}(𝐤)=\sqrt{M_{B,M}^2+𝐤^2}`$. The intermediate baryon and meson masses are denoted by $`M_B`$ and $`M_M`$, respectively, and $`\lambda `$ ($`m`$) is the helicity (spin) of the particle. Three-dimensional reduction of the full amplitude is not unique  and we follow Refs.  to obtain Eq. (1). It can be further decomposed into the principal integration part and the delta function part as

$`(\mathrm{FSI})`$ $`=`$ $`𝒫{\displaystyle 𝑑k^{}k^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\frac{𝖵(q,k^{};W)𝖡(k^{},k)}{WE_B(k^{})E_M(k^{})}}`$ (2)
$`i\rho _{BM}(k_t)𝖵(q,k_t;W)𝖡(k_t,k)\theta (WM_BM_M),`$
where

$$\rho _{BM}(k)=\frac{\pi kE_B(k)E_M(k)}{[E_B(k)+E_M(k)]},$$
(3)
and $`\theta (x)`$ is the step function ($`\theta (x)=1`$ for $`x>0`$ and $`0`$ otherwise). The delta function part, which contains $`\theta (x)`$, arises when the intermediate particles are their on mass shell and hence the intermediate state on-shell momentum $`k_t`$ is defined by

$$W=E_B(k_t)+E_M(k_t).$$
(4)
The intermediate states contain various baryon-meson states allowed by symmetries and quantum numbers. Therefore, we start first by selecting the intermediate states that are expected to be rather important. For this purpose, we collect some experimental informations on the cross sections of various meson photoproduction and the available experimental data are shown in Fig. 3. One can see that the cross sections of $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$ photoproductions are considerably larger than the other reactions. Based on this observation, we consider the intermediate $`\pi ^+n`$, $`\pi ^0p`$, and $`\rho ^0p`$ states.

We first consider the intermediate $`\rho ^0p`$ state, which is depicted in Fig. 4. Through the studies on $`\rho `$ photoproduction, we have learned that the $`\sigma `$ meson exchange is important at low energies . Thus our amplitude for $`\gamma p\rho ^0p`$ contains the Pomeron exchange, $`\pi `$ exchange, $`\sigma `$ exchange and nucleon pole terms as given in Ref. . The amplitude for $`\rho ^0p\omega p`$ is closely related to the $`\omega `$ photoproduction amplitude at tree level that is given in Fig. 1 via vector meson dominance. In addition to vector meson dominance, what we need is the $`\omega \rho \pi `$ interaction Lagrangian, which reads

$$_{\omega \rho \pi }=\frac{g_{\omega \rho \pi }}{2}\epsilon ^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }_\mu \omega _\nu \text{ Tr }(_\alpha \rho _\beta \pi ),$$
(5)
where $`\epsilon ^{0123}=+1`$, $`\pi =𝝅𝝉`$, $`\rho =𝝆𝝉`$. The coupling constant $`g_{\omega \rho \pi }`$ was estimated by vector meson dominance, massive Yang-Mills approach, and hidden gauge symmetry approach, etc  and the estimates are within $`1015`$ GeV-1. In our study, we use

$$g_{\omega \rho \pi }=12.9\text{ GeV}^1,$$
(6)
where its sign is fixed by SU(3) flavor symmetry. Therefore our amplitude for $`\rho ^0p\omega p`$ contains the pion exchange and the nucleon pole terms.

For intermediate pion-nucleon channel, we need to know the non-resonant part of pion photoproduction. But the most meson-exchange models are constructed to focus on the lower energy region, so its direct extension to our energy region, $`W2`$ GeV, is quite questionable. Because of this reason, we use the SAID program for the pion photoproduction amplitudes. Actually there is no experimental data for the total cross sections for pion photoproduction and the data shown in Fig. 3 are not experimental data but are extracted from the SAID program based on Ref. . There can be a few comments on this method. First, the SAID program is established to be valid up to $`E_\gamma =2`$ GeV and the extrapolation to the higher energy cannot be guaranteed. Therefore we will use the program only in the limited energy region $`W2`$ GeV. Second, the SAID program is believed to represent the experimental data. This means that the extracted amplitude should be assumed to include all nucleon resonance effects. However, since there is no simple meson-exchange model for pion photoproduction within our energy region, we will use this amplitude keeping its limitation in mind. The comparison of the model and the data are given in Fig. 5.

We next need the amplitude for pion induced $`\omega `$ production. This reaction has been discussed in Refs.  recently. It was also recently claimed that the final state interactions including nucleon resonances are very crucial to explain the experimental data in Ref. . Following Refs. , in this study we use the model shown in Fig. 6 concentrating on the low energy region, which is consistent with those model studies. In addition to the $`\omega \rho \pi `$ interaction Lagrangian (5), we need the $`\omega NN`$ and the $`\rho NN`$ couplings. As in our previous studies , we use

$$g_{\omega NN}=10.35,\kappa _\omega =0,g_{\rho NN}=6.12,\kappa _\omega =3.1,$$
(7)
where the $`\rho `$-nucleon coupling is consistent with the $`\rho `$ coupling universality. Then the scattering amplitude includes the isospin factor, which reads

$$C_I=\{\begin{array}{c}+1\text{ for }\pi ^0p\omega p\hfill \\ \sqrt{2}\text{ for }\pi ^{}p\omega n\text{}\pi ^+n\omega p\hfill \\ 1\text{ for }\pi ^0n\omega n\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
The form factors of the vertices can be found, for example, in Ref. . The calculated total cross section for $`\pi ^{}p\omega n`$ is shown in Fig. 7.111 The experimental data for the cross section of this reaction near threshold is controversial . In Fig. 7 we follow Ref. .

## 3 Results and Discussions

With the amplitudes discussed so far, we first compute the differential cross section for $`\omega `$ photoproduction at $`E_\gamma =1.23`$ GeV and $`1.68`$ GeV. The preliminary results are shown in Fig. 8. Since the purpose of this calculation is a rough estimate on the role of the final state interactions, we do not try to adjust parameters to fit the experimental data in this calculation. In Fig. 8, the solid lines are the results at tree level , the dotted lines are from the intermediate $`\rho ^0p`$ state. The intermediate $`\pi ^0p`$ and $`\pi ^+n`$ channels are represented by dashed and dot-dashed lines, respectively.

As we expected from Fig. 3 the contributions from these channels are not suppressed compared to the tree level results. Especially the charged pion channel gives the most important contribution among the intermediate state considered here. The role of the neutral pion intermediate state seems to be smaller than the other channels in the considered energy region. Since the $`\omega `$ photoproduction cross section is at the same order magnitude as the neutral pion photoproduction cross section and smaller than the $`\rho `$ photoproduction cross section, the contribution from the intermediate $`\omega p`$ channel is expected to be smaller than that from the $`\rho p`$ channel.

We also note that the differential cross section from the intermediate pion channel strongly depends on the momentum transfer $`t`$. While the $`\rho p`$ channel differential cross sections do not strongly depend on the scattering angle $`\theta `$, the pion channel contribution gives rise to strong peaks at backward angles like the $`u`$-channel nucleon exchange. Thus, careful analyses are required to distinguish the two mechanisms at backward scattering angles.

In summary, we calculate the one loop contribution to $`\omega `$ photoproduction with selected intermediate states. We found that the final state interactions, especially charged pion intermediate state, are not negligible in the considered energy region and may affect the parameters of the nucleon resonances which will be extracted from the forthcoming experimental data. Since the polarization asymmetries are suggested to be the most useful tools to investigate nucleon resonances, it would also be important to check the contribution from the final state interactions to the polarization asymmetries.

## Acknowledgments

Y.O. is grateful to Prof. M. Fujiwara for the warm hospitality during the symposium. This work was supported in part by the Brain Korea 21 project of Korean Ministry of Education, the International Collaboration Program of KOSEF under Grant No. 20006-111-01-2, and U.S. DOE Nuclear Physics Division Contract No. W-31-109-ENG-38.