format: text

text:
# The Algebraic Cluster Model. Three-body clusters 11footnote 1Annals of Physics (N.Y.), in press

## 1 Introduction

The Cluster Model of nuclei was introduced at the very beginning of Nuclear Physics as a natural consequence of the molecular viewpoint in which aggregates are formed by combining constituent units into composite objects. In particular, the alpha-particle model represented, for many years, a viable model of light nuclei . With the successes of the Nuclear Shell Model, the Cluster Model lost most of its appeal and the interest shifted in ‘deriving’ the alpha-particle model from the Nuclear Shell Model .A large literature exists in this direction, especially from the Japanese school . In recent years, clustering in nuclei has found renewed interest, since it appears that many new isotopes of light nuclei far from stability possess a cluster structure (not necessarely alpha). In view of this renewed interest, we have readdressed the question of clustering in nuclei with two purposes in mind. First, to analyze cluster configurations at the ’classical’ level in somewhat more detail than previously done, deriving explicit expressions for the density distribution and its multipole moments, and second, and most importantly, to introduce a formalism that allows one to study in a relatively simple fashion the actual situation which occurs in nuclei, where clustering is not a rigid-like molecular structure, but a rather soft (liquid-like) structure. The new approach is based on the bosonic quantization of many-body problems introduced by one of us . In this method, a quantum mechanical problem with $`\nu `$ space degrees of freedom is quantized in terms of elements of the Lie algebra $`U(\nu +1)`$. This method has been used in a variety of problems, ranging from Nuclear Physics to Molecular Physics, from Hadronic Physics to Polymer Physics and has proven to be very useful in analyzing experimental data. In a series of articles beginning with the present one, we intend to exploit the algebraic method for Cluster Physics. Two-body clusters, where the algebra is $`U(4)`$, have been discussed previously . Here we begin with three-body clusters, where the algebra is $`U(7)`$, and apply the method explicitly to the study of three-alpha configurations in nuclei, in particular to 12C. Many authors have suggested that this nucleus in its ground state is composed of three alpha-particles at the vertices of an equilateral triangle. In this article we study, both at the classical and at the quantum level, a configuration of three-particles at the vertices of an equilateral triangle (point-group symmetry $`𝒟_{3h}`$) and analyze the extent to which the experimental data support this configuration. A preliminary account of this part of our work has appeared . In addition to the study of properties of triangular configurations we also discuss other possible arrangements of three particles and their motion, in particular those corresponding to a six-dimensional spherical oscillator and to a six-dimensional deformed oscillator. Altough these configurations do not appear to describe well the experimental data in 12C the formulas we derive may be of interest in other situations involving three particles.

## 2 Classical treatment

The treatment of a triangular configuration in classical mechanics is very well known from molecular physics. However, this treatment is usualy done in terms of point-like constituents. Although the generalization to composite constituents is straighforward, in this introductory section we present some new and more detailed results.

### 2.1 Energies

We consider three identical particles of mass $`Am/3`$ at the vertices of an equilateral triangle (point-group symmetry $`𝒟_{3h}`$) (see Fig. 1). The origin is placed at the center of mass and the three particles span the $`xz`$ plane. The distance from the center is $`\beta `$. The spherical coordinates of the three particles $`\stackrel{}{r}_i=(r_i,\theta _i,\varphi _i)`$ are then $`(\beta ,0,0)`$, $`(\beta ,2\pi /3,\pi )`$ and $`(\beta ,2\pi /3,0)`$ for $`i=1,2`$ and $`3`$, respectively. For a mass distribution $`\rho (\stackrel{}{r})`$, rotational energies can be computed by evaluating the moments of inertia

$`_x`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle (y^2+z^2)\rho (\stackrel{}{r})𝑑\stackrel{}{r}},`$
$`_y`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle (z^2+x^2)\rho (\stackrel{}{r})𝑑\stackrel{}{r}},`$
$`_z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle (x^2+y^2)\rho (\stackrel{}{r})𝑑\stackrel{}{r}}.`$ (1)
The rotational energy is simply

$`E_{\mathrm{rot}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2_x}}L_x^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2_y}}L_y^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2_z}}L_z^2.`$ (2)
#### 2.1.1 Point-like masses

For a point-like mass distribution

$`\rho (\stackrel{}{r})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Am}{3}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\delta (\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{r}_i),`$ (3)
a simple calculation gives

$`_x=_z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Am\beta ^2,`$
$`_y`$ $`=`$ $`Am\beta ^2,`$ (4)
and thus

$`E_{\mathrm{rot}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Am\beta ^2}}\left[\stackrel{}{L}^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}K^2\right],`$ (5)
where $`\stackrel{}{L}`$ is the angular momentum and $`K`$ its projection on the three-fold $`y`$-axis.

#### 2.1.2 Extended mass distribution

Consider the case in which instead of point masses there are, at the vertices of the triangle, extended distributions. Since we have in mind applications to the alpha-particle model, we consider here the case in which the distribution is Gaussian

$`\rho (\stackrel{}{r})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Am}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\pi }}\right)^{3/2}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[\alpha \left(\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{r}_i\right)^2\right].`$ (6)
It is straightforward to compute the moments of inertia

$`_x=_z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Am\beta ^2\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\alpha \beta ^2}}\right),`$
$`_y`$ $`=`$ $`Am\beta ^2\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha \beta ^2}}\right).`$ (7)
The rotational energy is now given by

$`E_{\mathrm{rot}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Am\beta ^2\left(1+\frac{2}{\alpha \beta ^2}\right)}}\left[\stackrel{}{L}^2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha \beta ^2}{2(1+\alpha \beta ^2)}}K^2\right].`$ (8)
For typical values of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$, as for example those extracted from the form factors of 12C (discussed in the following sections), $`\alpha =0.52`$ fm-2 and $`\beta =1.74`$ fm, we find that the coefficient in front of $`K^2`$ reduces from $`0.50`$ to $`0.30`$. We note in general that the rotational energy of a symmetric top is given by

$`E_{\mathrm{rot}}`$ $`=`$ $`A\stackrel{}{L}^2+BK^2.`$ (9)
The top is called oblate if $`B<0`$, prolate if $`B>0`$ and spherical if $`B=0`$. Three particles on a plane are always oblate. The extended distribution tends to make the top less oblate.

Vibrational energies can be computed by tying the particles with strings and evaluating the eigenfrequencies . Denoting by $`q_1`$, $`q_2`$ and $`q_3`$ the displacements of the sides of the triangle and assuming a potential energy of the type

$`V`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C\left(q_1^2+q_2^2+q_3^2\right)+D\left(q_1q_2+q_2q_3+q_3q_1\right),`$ (10)
one can obtain the frequencies of the normal modes as

$`\omega _1`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{9(C+2D)}{Am}}},`$
$`\omega _2`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{9(CD)}{2Am}}}.`$ (11)
The vibration $`\omega _1`$ is singly degenerate, while the vibration $`\omega _2`$ is doubly degenerate.

### 2.2 Transition probabilities

Consider now the case in which the three particles have a charge $`Ze/3`$ (the case in which the particles have a magnetic moment will not be discussed here since we have in mind the alpha-particle model, where the constituents have no magnetic moment). The total charge distribution can be expanded into multipoles

$`\rho (\stackrel{}{r})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}m}{}}A_\mathrm{}m(r)Y_\mathrm{}m(\theta ,\varphi ),`$ (12)
with

$`A_\mathrm{}m(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle Y_\mathrm{}m^{}(\theta ,\varphi )\rho (\stackrel{}{r})d\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi }.`$ (13)
Instead of the charge distribution, one can consider the form factor, given by its Fourier transform

$`F(\stackrel{}{q})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Ze}}{\displaystyle e^{i\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{r}}\rho (\stackrel{}{r})𝑑\stackrel{}{r}}={\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}m}{}}F_\mathrm{}m(q)Y_\mathrm{}m(\widehat{q}),`$ (14)
with

$`F_\mathrm{}m(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{Ze}}{\displaystyle r^2A_\mathrm{}m(r)i^lj_{\mathrm{}}(qr)𝑑r}.`$ (15)
The multipole moments of the charge configuration are

$`Q_\mathrm{}m`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle r^lY_\mathrm{}m^{}(\theta ,\varphi )\rho (\stackrel{}{r})𝑑\stackrel{}{r}}={\displaystyle A_\mathrm{}m(r)r^{\mathrm{}+2}𝑑r}`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Ze}{4\pi }}(2\mathrm{}+1)!!\underset{q0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{F_\mathrm{}m(q)}{i^{\mathrm{}}q^{\mathrm{}}}}.`$
From these multipole moments, the transition probabilities can be calculated classically . The transition probability per unit time is

$`T(E\mathrm{})`$ $`=`$ $`8\pi c{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{hc}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}+1}{\mathrm{}\left[(2\mathrm{}+1)!!\right]^2}}k^{2\mathrm{}+1}B(E\mathrm{}),`$ (17)
where

$`B(E\mathrm{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}Q_\mathrm{}m^{}Q_\mathrm{}m.`$ (18)
#### 2.2.1 Point charges

For a point-like charge distribution

$`\rho (\stackrel{}{r})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Ze}{3}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\delta (\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{r}_i),`$ (19)
the form factor is given by

$`F(\stackrel{}{q})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}e^{i\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{r}_i}.`$ (20)
The corresponding $`B(E\mathrm{})`$ values are

$`B(E\mathrm{})`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{Ze}{3}}\right)^2\beta ^2\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{}+1}{4\pi }}\left[3+6P_{\mathrm{}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})\right],`$ (21)
which gives

$`B(E2)`$ $`=`$ $`(Ze)^2{\displaystyle \frac{5}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\beta ^4,`$
$`B(E3)`$ $`=`$ $`(Ze)^2{\displaystyle \frac{7}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{5}{8}}\beta ^6,`$
$`B(E4)`$ $`=`$ $`(Ze)^2{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{9}{64}}\beta ^8.`$ (22)
The dipole radiation $`B(E1)`$ vanishes because of the spatial symmetry of the charge distribution.

#### 2.2.2 Extended charge distributions

Next we consider the case in which instead of point charges there are, at the vertices of the triangle, extended distributions

$`\rho (\stackrel{}{r})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Ze}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\pi }}\right)^{3/2}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[\alpha \left(\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{r}_i\right)^2\right]`$ (23)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Ze}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\pi }}\right)^{3/2}e^{\alpha (r^2+\beta ^2)}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}\pi {\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda =0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}i_\lambda (2\alpha \beta r)Y_\lambda (\theta ,\varphi )Y_\lambda ^{}(\theta _i,\varphi _i),`$
where $`i_\lambda (x)=j_\lambda (ix)/i^\lambda `$ is the modified spherical Bessel function. The corresponding form factor is that of the point-like charge distribution multiplied by an exponential

$`F(\stackrel{}{q})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}e^{q^2/4\alpha }{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}e^{i\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{r}_i}.`$ (24)
The $`B(E\mathrm{})`$ values of the extended charge distribution are the same as those of the point-like configuration.

## 3 Quantum treatment

The quantum treatment of an identical three-body cluster can be done in several ways. The most straightforward is to introduce relative Jacobi coordinates

$`\stackrel{}{\rho }`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}_2\right)/\sqrt{2},`$
$`\stackrel{}{\lambda }`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\stackrel{}{r}_1+\stackrel{}{r}_22\stackrel{}{r}_3\right)/\sqrt{6},`$ (25)
write down a Hamiltonian in terms of these coordinates and their canonically conjugate momenta $`\stackrel{}{p}_\rho `$ and $`\stackrel{}{p}_\lambda `$, and solve the Schrödinger equation

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m}}(\stackrel{}{p}_\rho ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}+\stackrel{}{p}_\lambda ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})+V(\stackrel{}{\rho },\stackrel{}{\lambda })\right]\psi (\stackrel{}{\rho },\stackrel{}{\lambda })`$ $`=`$ $`E\psi (\stackrel{}{\rho },\stackrel{}{\lambda }),`$ (26)
to obtain the energy eigenvalues and eigenvectors.

### 3.1 Energies

It is convenient to make a change of variables to coordinates ($`r`$, $`\xi `$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho `$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda `$) which are related to the Jacobi coordinates ($`\rho `$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho `$, $`\lambda `$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda `$) by

$`\rho =r\mathrm{sin}\xi ,`$ $`\lambda =r\mathrm{cos}\xi .`$ (27)
In the new coordinates, the kinetic energy is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2mr^5}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}\left(r^5{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2mr^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\xi ^2}}4\mathrm{cot}2\xi {\displaystyle \frac{}{\xi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{L}_\rho ^2(\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho )}{\mathrm{sin}^2\xi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{L}_\lambda ^2(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )}{\mathrm{cos}^2\xi }}\right].`$ (28)
In this section, we consider three different potentials, namely the harmonic oscillator, the deformed oscillator and the oblate symmetric top. For potentials that only depend on the hyperradius $`r`$, the Schrödinger equation can be solved by separation of variables into an angular and a radial equation

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\xi ^2}}4\mathrm{cot}2\xi {\displaystyle \frac{}{\xi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{L}_\rho ^2(\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho )}{\mathrm{sin}^2\xi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{L}_\lambda ^2(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )}{\mathrm{cos}^2\xi }}\right]\psi (\xi ,\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho ,\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma (\sigma +4)\psi (\xi ,\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho ,\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ),`$
$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^5}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}\left(r^5{\displaystyle \frac{}{r}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma (\sigma +4)}{2mr^2}}+V(r)\right]\psi (r)`$ $`=`$ $`E\psi (r).`$ (29)
For the six-dimensional harmonic oscillator

$`V(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Cr^2,`$ (30)
the energy spectrum can be obtained exactly

$`E(n)`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ(n+3),`$ (31)
with $`n=0,1,\mathrm{}`$ , and $`ϵ=\sqrt{C/m}`$. The allowed values of $`\sigma `$ are $`\sigma =n,n2,\mathrm{},1`$ or $`0`$ for $`n`$ odd or even, respectively.

For the six-dimensional displaced (or deformed) oscillator

$`V(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C(rr_0)^2,`$ (32)
the energy eigenvalues cannot be obtained exactly. An approximate solution, valid in the limit of small oscillations around the equilibrium value $`r_0`$ is

$`E(v,\sigma )`$ $``$ $`ϵ(v+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2mr_0^2}}\left[\sigma (\sigma +4)+{\displaystyle \frac{15}{4}}\right],`$ (33)
with $`ϵ=\sqrt{C/m}`$. The first term gives a harmonic vibrational spectrum with $`v=0,1,\mathrm{}`$ , and the second term gives the rotational spectrum with $`\sigma =0,1,\mathrm{}`$ .

In general, the potential is not invariant under six-dimensional rotations as in the previous two examples, but only under rotations in three dimensions. One can introduce the total angular momentum $`\stackrel{}{I}=\stackrel{}{L}_\rho +\stackrel{}{L_\lambda }`$, and make a transformation of variables to the relative angle $`2\theta `$ between the two vectors

$`\mathrm{cos}2\theta `$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\rho }\widehat{\lambda },`$ (34)
and the Euler angles $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of the intrinsic frame defined by

$`\widehat{1}={\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\rho }\times \widehat{\lambda }}{\mathrm{sin}2\theta }},\widehat{2}={\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\rho }\widehat{\lambda }}{2\mathrm{sin}\theta }},\widehat{3}={\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\rho }+\widehat{\lambda }}{2\mathrm{cos}\theta }}.`$ (35)
In the new variables, the angular momentum dependent terms in the kinetic energy are given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{L}_\rho ^2(\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho )}{\mathrm{sin}^2\xi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{L}_\lambda ^2(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )}{\mathrm{cos}^2\xi }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\mathrm{sin}^2\xi \mathrm{cos}^2\xi }}\left(\stackrel{}{I}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}+\mathrm{tan}^2\theta I_2^2+\mathrm{cot}^2\theta I_3^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\theta ^2}}2\mathrm{cot}2\theta {\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta }}\right)`$ (36)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}2\xi }{2\mathrm{sin}^2\xi \mathrm{cos}^2\xi }}\left(\mathrm{cot}\theta I_2I_3\mathrm{tan}\theta I_3I_2+iI_1{\displaystyle \frac{}{\theta }}\right).`$
The potential only depends on the intrinsic variables $`r`$, $`\xi `$ and $`\theta `$. An interesting situation occurs when the potential has sharp minima in $`r`$, $`\xi `$ and $`\theta `$

$`V(r,\xi ,\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C(rr_0)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}A(\xi \xi _0)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}B(\theta \theta _0)^2.`$ (37)
In the limit of small oscillations around $`r_0`$, $`\xi _0=\pi /4`$ and $`\theta _0=\pi /4`$, rotations and vibrations decouple, and the set of resulting differential equations can be solved in closed form

$`E(v_1,v_{2a},v_{2b},I,K)`$ $``$ $`ϵ_1(v_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})+ϵ_{2a}(v_{2a}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})+ϵ_{2b}(v_{2b}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})`$ (38)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{mr_0^2}}\left[I(I+1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}K^2{\displaystyle \frac{9}{8}}\right],`$
with $`ϵ_1=\sqrt{C/m}`$, $`ϵ_{2a}=\sqrt{A/mr_0^2}`$ and $`ϵ_{2b}=\sqrt{B/mr_0^2}`$. Here $`K`$ is the projection of the angular momentum $`I`$ on the symmetry axis $`\widehat{1}`$.

For three identical masses, the potential has to be invariant under their permutation, i.e. the coefficients $`A`$ and $`B`$ are equal. As a consequence, the vibrations $`v_{2a}`$ and $`v_{2b}`$ form a doubly degenerate vibration, and it is convenient to use instead of $`v_{2a}`$ and $`v_{2b}`$ the quantum numbers $`v_2^\mathrm{}_2`$ where $`\mathrm{}_2=v_2,v_22,\mathrm{},1`$ or $`0`$ for $`v_2=v_{2a}+v_{2b}`$ odd or even. The vibrational energies can then be written as

$`E_{\mathrm{vib}}(v_1,v_2)`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_1(v_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})+ϵ_2(v_2+1).`$ (39)
The rotational energies

$`E_{\mathrm{rot}}(I,K)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{mr_0^2}}\left[I(I+1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}K^2\right],`$ (40)
are the same as derived classically for a triangular distribution of three identical point-like masses of Eq. (5) with $`\stackrel{}{L}^2`$ replaced by $`I(I+1)`$. The spectrum is that of an oblate symmetric top.

The triangular configuration with three identical masses has discrete symmetry $`𝒟_{3h}`$. Among the quantum numbers, it is convenient to add the parity $`P`$ and the transformation properties of the states under $`𝒟_{3h}`$. Since $`𝒟_{3h}𝒟_3\times P`$, the transformation properties under $`𝒟_{3h}`$ are labeled by parity and the representations of $`𝒟_3S_3`$. $`𝒟_3`$ has two one-dimensional representations, usually denoted by $`A_1`$ and $`A_2`$, and a two-dimensional representation denoted by $`E`$. The corresponding Young tableau of the permutation group $`S_3`$ are

$`t=A_1`$ $`:`$ $`\begin{array}{c}\text{}\hfill \end{array}`$ (42)
$`t=E`$ $`:`$ $`\begin{array}{c}\text{}\hfill \end{array}`$ (44)
$`t=A_2`$ $`:`$ $`\begin{array}{c}\text{}\hfill \end{array}`$ (46)
For three identical particles, the wave functions must transform as the symmetric representations $`A_1`$ of $`𝒟_3S_3`$.

### 3.2 Transition probabilities

Transition probabilities, charge radii and other electromagnetic properties of interest can be obtained from the transition form factors. For electric transitions (the only ones discussed here) the form factors are the matrix elements of the Fourier transform of the charge distribution

$`F(if;\stackrel{}{q})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑\stackrel{}{r}e^{i\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{r}}\gamma _f,L_f,M_f|\widehat{\rho }(\stackrel{}{r})|\gamma _i,L_i,M_i},`$ (47)
where $`\gamma `$ denotes the quantum numbers needed to classify the states uniquely. For the point-like charge configuration of Eq. (19), the transition form factor reduces to

$`F(if;\stackrel{}{q})`$ $`=`$ $`Ze{\displaystyle \underset{M}{}}𝒟_{M_fM}^{(L_f)}(\widehat{q})(if;q)𝒟_{MM_i}^{(L_i)}(\widehat{q}),`$ (48)
with

$`(if;q)`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma _f,L_f,M|e^{iq\sqrt{2/3}\lambda _z}|\gamma _i,L_i,M.`$ (49)
Here we have used the permutation symmetry of the initial and final wave functions, a transformation to Jacobi coordinates, and an integration over the center-of-mass coordinate. In Table 1 we show some form factors for the transition from the ground state to an excited state $`(0_1^+L_i^P;q)`$. The form factors for harmonic oscillator show an exponential dependence on the momentum transfer , whereas for the deformed oscillator and the oblate top they behave as cylindrical  and spherical Bessel functions , respectively. The form factors associated with the extended charge distribution of Eq. (23) can be obtained, as in the classical case, by multiplying the results from Table 1 by a Gaussian $`\mathrm{exp}(q^2/4\alpha )`$, which represents the form factor of the $`\alpha `$ particle.

The transition probability $`B(EL)`$ can be extracted from the form factors in the long wavelength limit

$`B(EL;if)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[(2L+1)!!]^2}{4\pi (2L_i+1)}}\underset{q0}{lim}{\displaystyle \underset{M_fM_i}{}}\left|F(if;\stackrel{}{q})\right|^2/q^{2L}`$ (50)
$`=`$ $`(Ze)^2{\displaystyle \frac{[(2L+1)!!]^2}{4\pi (2L_i+1)}}\underset{q0}{lim}{\displaystyle \underset{M}{}}\left|(if;q)\right|^2/q^{2L}.`$
In the case of the oblate symmetric top, we find for the rotational excitations of the ground state the same results as for the multipole radiation in the classical case (see Eq. (22))

$`B(E2;0^+2^+)`$ $`=`$ $`(Ze)^2{\displaystyle \frac{5}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\beta ^4,`$
$`B(E3;0^+3^{})`$ $`=`$ $`(Ze)^2{\displaystyle \frac{7}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{5}{8}}\beta ^6,`$
$`B(E4;0^+4^+)`$ $`=`$ $`(Ze)^2{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{9}{64}}\beta ^8.`$ (51)
The ground state rotational band of the oblate top does not have a symmetric state with $`L^P=1^{}`$, which is in agreement with the absence of dipole radiation in the classical treatment.

The ground state charge distribution can be extracted from the elastic form factor by taking the Fourier transform

$`\rho (r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\stackrel{}{q}F(0_1^+0_1^+;\stackrel{}{q})e^{i\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{r}}}`$ (52)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Ze}{2\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle q^2𝑑qj_0(qr)(0_1^+0_1^+;q)}.`$
For the case of the oblate top, the ground state charge distribution can be derived as

$`\rho (r)`$ $`=`$ $`Ze\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\pi }}\right)^{3/2}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\alpha \beta r}}\left[e^{\alpha (\beta r)^2}e^{\alpha (\beta +r)^2}\right].`$ (53)
The charge radius can be obtained from the slope of the elastic form factor in the origin

$`r^2^{1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[6{\displaystyle \frac{d(0_1^+0_1^+;q)}{dq^2}}|_{q=0}\right]^{1/2}.`$ (54)
In Table 1 we have introduced a scale parameter $`\beta `$ in the form factors, such that the charge radius for the harmonic oscillator, the deformed oscillator and the oblate top is given by

$`r^2^{1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2\alpha }}+\beta ^2}.`$ (55)
## 4 Algebraic treatment

In this section, we discuss an algebraic treatment of three-cluster systems, in which the eigenvalue problem is solved by matrix diagonalization instead of by solving a set of differential equations. In the algebraic cluster model (ACM), the method of bosonic quantization is used. This method consists in quantizing the Jacobi coordinates and momenta with boson operators and adding an additional scalar boson

$`b_{\rho ,m}^{},b_{\lambda ,m}^{},s^{}`$ $``$ $`c_\alpha ^{}(m=0,\pm 1)(\alpha =1,\mathrm{},7)`$ (56)
The role of the additional scalar boson is to compactify the space thus making calculations of matrix elements simpler. The set of 49 bilinear products of creation and annihilation operators spans the Lie algebra of $`U(7)`$

$`𝒢`$ $`:`$ $`G_{\alpha \beta }=c_\alpha ^{}c_\beta (\alpha ,\beta =1,\mathrm{},7)`$ (57)
All operators are expanded into elements of this algebra.

The most generic Hamiltonian which includes up to two-body terms and is invariant under the permutation group $`S_3`$, contains 10 parameters that describe the relative motion of a system of three identical clusters. It can be written as

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_0s^{}\stackrel{~}{s}ϵ_1(b_\rho ^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho +b_\lambda ^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )+u_0(s^{}s^{}\stackrel{~}{s}\stackrel{~}{s})u_1s^{}(b_\rho ^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho +b_\lambda ^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )\stackrel{~}{s}`$ (58)
$`+v_0\left[(b_\rho ^{}b_\rho ^{}+b_\lambda ^{}b_\lambda ^{})\stackrel{~}{s}\stackrel{~}{s}+s^{}s^{}(\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho +\stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{l=0,2}{}}w_l(b_\rho ^{}\times b_\rho ^{}+b_\lambda ^{}\times b_\lambda ^{})^{(l)}(\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho +\stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )^{(l)}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{l=0,2}{}}c_l\left[(b_\rho ^{}\times b_\rho ^{}b_\lambda ^{}\times b_\lambda ^{})^{(l)}(\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )^{(l)}+4(b_\rho ^{}\times b_\lambda ^{})^{(l)}(\stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho )^{(l)}\right]`$
$`+c_1(b_\rho ^{}\times b_\lambda ^{})^{(1)}(\stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho )^{(1)},`$
with $`\stackrel{~}{b}_{\rho ,m}=(1)^{1m}b_{\rho ,m}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{b}_{\lambda ,m}=(1)^{1m}b_{\lambda ,m}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{s}=s`$. Here the dots indicate scalar products and the crosses tensor products with respect to the rotation group. By construction, the Hamiltonian commutes with the number operator

$`\widehat{N}`$ $`=`$ $`s^{}\stackrel{~}{s}b_\rho ^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho b_\lambda ^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda =s^{}s+{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\left(b_{\rho ,m}^{}b_{\rho ,m}+b_{\lambda ,m}^{}b_{\lambda ,m}\right),`$ (59)
and therefore conserves the total number of bosons $`N=n_s+n_\rho +n_\lambda `$. In addition to $`N`$, the eigenfunctions have good angular momentum $`L`$, parity $`P`$, and permutation symmetry $`t`$. The three symmetry classes of the $`S_3`$ permutation group are characterized by the irreducible representations: $`t=S`$ for the one-dimensional symmetric representation, $`t=A`$ for the one-dimensional antisymmetric representation, and $`t=M`$ for the two-dimensional mixed symmetry representation.

### 4.1 Dynamic symmetries

The $`S_3`$ invariant $`U(7)`$ mass operator of Eq. (58) has a rich algebraic structure. It is of general interest to study limiting situations, in which the energy spectra can be obtained in closed form. These special cases correspond to dynamic symmetries of the Hamiltonian. Dynamic symmetries arise, when (i) the Hamiltonian has an algebraic structure $`G`$, and (ii) it can be expressed in terms of Casimir invariants of a chain of subalgebras of $`G`$ only. Here we consider two different dynamic symmetries, corresponding to the six-dimensional spherical and deformed oscillator cases discussed in the Schrödinger picture in Sect. 3.

For $`v_0=0`$ in Eq. (58), we recover the six-dimensional oscillator model, since there is no coupling between different harmonic oscillator shells. The oscillator is harmonic if all terms except $`ϵ_0`$ and $`ϵ_1`$ are set to zero, otherwise it is anharmonic. This dynamic symmetry corresponds to the reduction

$`U(7)U(6),\mathrm{}`$ (60)
The dots here indicate further algebras needed to classify the states uniquely. Since our purpose here is to present a global analysis of the situation, we do not dwell on the group theoretical aspects of this problem and rather note that the one-body Hamiltonian

$`H_1`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_1(b_\rho ^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho +b_\lambda ^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )`$ (61)
$`=`$ $`ϵ_1{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}(b_{\rho ,m}^{}b_{\rho ,m}+b_{\lambda ,m}^{}b_{\lambda ,m})`$
$`=`$ $`ϵ_1\widehat{C}_{1U(6)},`$
gives the energy spectrum of a six-dimensional spherical oscillator

$`E_1(n)`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_1n.`$ (62)
Here $`\widehat{C}_{1U(6)}`$ denotes the linear Casimir operator of $`U(6)`$. The label $`n`$ represents the number of oscillator quanta $`n=n_\rho +n_\lambda =0,1,\mathrm{},N`$. This special case is called the $`U(6)`$ limit. In Fig. 2 we show the structure of the spectrum of the spherical harmonic oscillator with $`U(6)`$ symmetry. For three identical clusters, the wave functions must transform as the symmetric representation $`t=S`$ of the permutation group $`S_3`$. The levels are grouped into oscillator shells characterized by $`n`$. In Fig. 2, the levels belonging to an oscillator shell $`n`$ are further classified by $`\sigma =n,n2,\mathrm{},1`$ or $`0`$ for $`n`$ odd or even. The quantum number $`\sigma `$ labels the representations of $`SO(6)`$, a subgroup of $`U(6)`$. The ground state has $`n=0`$ and $`L^P=0^+`$. We note, that the $`n=\sigma =1`$ shell is absent, since it does not contain a symmetric state with $`t=S`$. The two-phonon multiplet $`n=2`$ consists of the states $`L^P=2^+`$ with $`\sigma =2`$ and $`0^+`$ with $`\sigma =0`$. The degeneracy of the harmonic oscillator shells can be split by adding invariants of subgroups of $`U(6)`$ .

For the six-dimensional spherical oscillator, the number of oscillator quanta $`n`$ is a good quantum number. However, when $`v_00`$ in Eq. (58), the oscillator shells with $`\mathrm{\Delta }n=\pm 2`$ are mixed, and the eigenfunctions are spread over many different oscillator shells. A dynamic symmetry that involves the mixing between oscillator shells, is provided by the reduction

$`U(7)SO(7)SO(6)\mathrm{}`$ (63)
Again the dots indicate further subalgebras needed to classify the states uniquely. They can be taken as discussed previously. We consider now an algebraic Hamiltonian of the form

$`H_2`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa \left[\widehat{N}(\widehat{N}+5)(\widehat{D}_\rho \widehat{D}_\rho +\widehat{D}_\lambda \widehat{D}_\lambda )\right]`$ (64)
$`=`$ $`\kappa \left[\widehat{N}(\widehat{N}+5)\widehat{C}_{2SO(7)}+\widehat{C}_{2SO(6)}\right]`$
$`=`$ $`\kappa \left[(s^{}s^{}b_\rho ^{}b_\rho ^{}b_\lambda ^{}b_\lambda ^{})(\stackrel{~}{s}\stackrel{~}{s}\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )+\widehat{C}_{2SO(6)}\right],`$
where $`\widehat{N}`$ is the number operator of Eq. (59) and $`\widehat{D}`$ denote the dipole operators

$`\widehat{D}_{\rho ,m}`$ $`=`$ $`(b_\rho ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{s}s^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho )_m^{(1)},`$
$`\widehat{D}_{\lambda ,m}`$ $`=`$ $`(b_\lambda ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{s}s^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )_m^{(1)}.`$ (65)
The operators $`\widehat{C}_{2SO(7)}`$ and $`\widehat{C}_{2SO(6)}`$ represent the quadratic Casimir operators of $`SO(7)`$ and $`SO(6)`$, respectively. The energy spectrum in this case, called the $`SO(7)`$ limit, is given by the eigenvalues of the Casimir operators $`\widehat{C}_{2SO(7)}=\omega (\omega +5)`$ and $`\widehat{C}_{2SO(6)}=\sigma (\sigma +4)`$

$`E_2(\omega ,\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa [(N\omega )(N+\omega +5)+\sigma (\sigma +4)].`$ (66)
Here $`\omega =N,N2,\mathrm{},1`$ or $`0`$ for $`N`$ odd or even, respectively, labels the symmetric representations of $`SO(7)`$, and $`\sigma =0,2,3,\mathrm{},\omega `$ those of $`SO(6)`$ (note that $`\sigma =1`$ is missing, since it doesnot contain a symmetric state). The correspondence with the energy spectrum of the deformed oscillator of Eq. (33) can be seen by introducing a vibrational quantum number $`v=(N\omega )/2`$. The energy formula reduces to

$`E_2(v,\sigma )`$ $`=`$ $`4\kappa Nv\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2v5}{2N}}\right)+\kappa \sigma (\sigma +4),`$ (67)
which to leading order in $`N`$, is linear in the vibrational quantum number. In Fig. 3 we show the spectrum of the deformed oscillator with $`SO(7)`$ symmetry. The states are now ordered in bands labeled by $`\omega `$, rather than in harmonic oscillator shells. Although the size of the model space, and hence the total number of states, is the same as for the harmonic oscillator, the ordering and classification of the states is different. For example, in the $`U(6)`$ limit all states are vibrational, whereas the $`SO(7)`$ limit gives rise to a rotational-vibrational spectrum, characterized by a series of rotational bands which are labeled by $`\omega `$, or equivalently by the vibrational quantum number $`v=(N\omega )/2=0,1,\mathrm{}`$ .

### 4.2 Oblate symmetric top

This situation does not correspond to a dynamic symmetry of the Hamiltonian $`H`$. However it is relatively simple to construct an algebraic Hamiltonian that produces the spectrum of an oblate symmetric top. This Hamiltonian was suggested in our preliminary account of this work . It can be written as

$`H_3`$ $`=`$ $`\xi _1(s^{}s^{}b_\rho ^{}b_\rho ^{}b_\lambda ^{}b_\lambda ^{})(\stackrel{~}{s}\stackrel{~}{s}\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )`$ (68)
$`+\xi _2\left[(b_\rho ^{}b_\rho ^{}b_\lambda ^{}b_\lambda ^{})(\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )+4(b_\rho ^{}b_\lambda ^{})(\stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho )\right]`$
$`+2\kappa _1(b_\rho ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho +b_\lambda ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )^{(1)}(b_\rho ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho +b_\lambda ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )^{(1)}`$
$`+3\kappa _2(b_\rho ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda b_\lambda ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho )^{(0)}(b_\lambda ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho b_\rho ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )^{(0)}.`$
Since this Hamiltonian does not correspond to a dynamic symmetry, its spectrum must be obtained by diagonalizing it in an appropriate basis. A computer program has been written for this purpose by one of us (RB) and is available upon request . An approximate energy formula can be obtained by making use of the method of intrinsic or coherent states as discussed in the following section.

## 5 Geometric analysis

The geometric properties of the general algebraic Hamiltonian $`H`$ of Eq. (58) can be studied by using intrinsic or coherent states . The ground state coherent state for the problem at hand can be written as

$$|N;\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\rho ,\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\lambda =\frac{1}{\sqrt{N!}}(b_c^{})^N|0,$$
(69)
with

$$b_c^{}=\sqrt{1\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\rho \stackrel{}{\alpha }_\rho ^{}\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\lambda \stackrel{}{\alpha }_\lambda ^{}}s^{}+\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\rho \stackrel{}{b}_\rho ^{}+\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\lambda \stackrel{}{b}_\lambda ^{}.$$
(70)
The condensate boson Eq. (70) is parametrized in terms of two vectors, $`\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\rho `$ and $`\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\lambda `$, which can be transformed to intrinsic coordinates $`q_\rho `$, $`\theta _\rho `$, $`\varphi _\rho `$, and $`q_\lambda `$, $`\theta _\lambda `$, $`\varphi _\lambda `$, and their conjugate momenta

$$\alpha _{k,\mu }=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\underset{\nu }{}𝒟_{\mu \nu }^{(1)}(\varphi _k,\theta _k,0)\beta _{k,\nu },$$
(71)
with

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\beta _{k,1}\\ \beta _{k,0}\\ \beta _{k,1}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}[p_{\varphi _k}/\mathrm{sin}\theta _kip_{\theta _k}]/q_k\sqrt{2}\\ q_k+ip_k\\ [p_{\varphi _k}/\mathrm{sin}\theta _k+ip_{\theta _k}]/q_k\sqrt{2}\end{array}\right),$$
(72)
with $`k=\rho `$, $`\lambda `$. The classical limit of a normal ordered operator can be defined as the coherent state expectation value of the operator divided by the number of bosons $`N`$.

### 5.1 Dynamic symmetries

We start by analyzing the two dynamic symmetries discussed in the previous section. For the $`U(6)`$ limit, the classical limit of the Hamiltonian is given by

$`H_{1,\mathrm{cl}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}N;\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\rho ,\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\lambda :H_1:N;\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\rho ,\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\lambda `$ (73)
$`=`$ $`ϵ_1(\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\rho \stackrel{}{\alpha }_\rho ^{}+\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\lambda \stackrel{}{\alpha }_\lambda ^{})`$
$`=`$ $`ϵ_1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(p_\rho ^2+q_\rho ^2+\stackrel{}{L}_\rho ^2/q_\rho ^2+p_\lambda ^2+q_\lambda ^2+\stackrel{}{L}_\lambda ^2/q_\lambda ^2\right),`$
where $`\stackrel{}{L}_k^2`$ is the angular momentum in polar coordinates

$`\stackrel{}{L}_k^2`$ $`=`$ $`p_{\theta _k}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\varphi _k}^2}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _k}},`$ (74)
with $`k=\rho `$, $`\lambda `$. Eq. (73) confirms the interpretation of the $`U(6)`$ limit in terms of a six-dimensional spherical oscillator.

For the $`SO(7)`$ limit, we find

$`H_{2,\mathrm{cl}}`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa (N1)\left[q^2p^2+(1q^2)^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\chi ^2}}4\mathrm{cot}2\chi {\displaystyle \frac{}{\chi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{L}_\rho ^2}{\mathrm{sin}^2\chi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{L}_\lambda ^2}{\mathrm{cos}^2\chi }}\right].`$ (75)
Here we have made a change to hyperspherical variables

$$q_\rho =q\mathrm{sin}\chi ,q_\lambda =q\mathrm{cos}\chi ,$$
(76)
and their conjugate momenta. In the limit of small oscillations around the minimum of the potential energy surface $`q=1+\mathrm{\Delta }q`$ we find to leading order in $`N`$ a one-dimensional harmonic oscillator in the hyperradius $`q`$

$`H_{2,\mathrm{cl}}`$ $``$ $`\kappa N\left(p^2+4(\mathrm{\Delta }q)^2\right),`$ (77)
with frequency $`4\kappa N`$. To leading order in $`N`$, the frequency coincides with that of Eq. (67). This analysis shown the connection between the $`SO(7)`$ dynamical symmetry and the displaced oscillator.

### 5.2 Oblate symmetric top

For the oblate symmetric top, the method of intrinsic states becomes particularly useful, since this case does not correpond to a dynamic symmetry. We first consider the vibrational part of the Hamiltonian of Eq. (68)

$`H_{3,\mathrm{vib}}`$ $`=`$ $`\xi _1(R^2s^{}s^{}b_\rho ^{}b_\rho ^{}b_\lambda ^{}b_\lambda ^{})(R^2\stackrel{~}{s}\stackrel{~}{s}\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )`$ (78)
$`+\xi _2\left[(b_\rho ^{}b_\rho ^{}b_\lambda ^{}b_\lambda ^{})(\stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )+4(b_\rho ^{}b_\lambda ^{})(\stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho )\right].`$
For $`R^2=0`$, this Hamiltonian has $`U(7)U(6)`$ symmetry and corresponds to a spherical vibrator, whereas for $`R^2=1`$ and $`\xi _2=0`$ it has $`U(7)SO(7)`$ symmetry and corresponds to a deformed oscillator. Here we analyze the general case with $`R^20`$ and $`\xi _1`$, $`\xi _2>0`$. The classical limit of the Hamiltonian of Eq. (78) has a complicated structure. The equilibrium configuration of the potential energy surface is given by

$$q_0=\sqrt{2R^2/(1+R^2)},\chi _0=\pi /4,\zeta _0=\pi /4,$$
(79)
where the relative angle between $`\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\rho `$ and $`\stackrel{}{\alpha }_\lambda `$ is denoted by $`2\zeta `$. In the limit of small oscillations around the minimum $`q=q_0+\mathrm{\Delta }q`$, $`\chi =\chi _0+\mathrm{\Delta }\chi `$ and $`\zeta =\zeta _0+\mathrm{\Delta }\zeta `$, the intrinsic degrees of freedom $`q`$, $`\chi `$ and $`\zeta `$ decouple and become harmonic. To leading order in $`N`$ we find

$`H_{3,\mathrm{cl}}`$ $`=`$ $`\xi _1N\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2R^2}{1+R^2}}p^2+2R^2(1+R^2)(\mathrm{\Delta }q)^2\right]`$ (80)
$`+\xi _2N\left[p_\chi ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{4R^4}{(1+R^2)^2}}(\mathrm{\Delta }\chi )^2+p_\zeta ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{4R^4}{(1+R^2)^2}}(\mathrm{\Delta }\zeta )^2\right].`$
Standard quantization of the harmonic oscillator yields the vibrational energy spectrum of an oblate top

$`E_{3,\mathrm{vib}}(v_1,v_2)`$ $`=`$ $`\omega _1(v_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})+\omega _2(v_2+1),`$ (81)
with frequencies

$$\omega _1=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}NR^2\xi _1,\omega _2=\frac{4NR^2}{1+R^2}\xi _2,$$
(82)
in agreement with the results obtained in a normal mode analysis . Here $`v_1`$ and $`v_2`$ represent vibrational quantum numbers for a one- and two-dimensional harmonic oscillator, respectively.

We consider next the rotational part of the Hamiltonian which can be rewritten as

$`H_{3,\mathrm{rot}}`$ $`=`$ $`2\kappa _1(b_\rho ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho +b_\lambda ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )^{(1)}(b_\rho ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho +b_\lambda ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )^{(1)}`$ (83)
$`+3\kappa _2(b_\rho ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda b_\lambda ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho )^{(0)}(b_\lambda ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\rho b_\rho ^{}\times \stackrel{~}{b}_\lambda )^{(0)}.`$
Both terms commute with the general $`S_3`$ invariant Hamiltonian of Eq. (58) and hence correspond to exact symmetries. The eigenvalues are given by

$`E_{3,\mathrm{rot}}`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _1L(L+1)+\kappa _2m_F^2`$ (84)
$`=`$ $`\kappa _1L(L+1)+\kappa _2(K2\mathrm{}_2)^2.`$
Here we have used, that for the oblate top the quantum number $`m_F`$ is related to the projection $`K`$ of the angular momentum on the symmetry-axis and $`\mathrm{}_2`$ . The last term contains the effects of the Coriolis force which gives rise to a $`8\kappa _2K\mathrm{}_2`$ splitting of the rotational levels.

The total (rotation-vibration) wave functions of a rigid triangular configuration can be written as

$$(v_1,v_2^\mathrm{}_2);K,L_t^P,M.$$
(85)
For three identical particles, the wave functions for rigid configurations must transform as the symmetric representations $`A_1`$ of $`𝒟_3S_3`$. This imposes some conditions on the allowed values of the angular momenta. For vibrational bands with $`\mathrm{}_2=0`$ and $`1`$, the allowed values of the angular momenta are

$`\begin{array}{ccc}(v_1,v_2^{\mathrm{}_2=0}):\hfill & K=3n\hfill & n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}\hfill \\ & L=0,2,4,\mathrm{}\hfill & \text{ for }K=0\hfill \\ & L=K,K+1,K+2,\mathrm{}\hfill & \text{ for }K0\hfill \\ (v_1,v_2^{\mathrm{}_2=1}):\hfill & K=3n+1,3n+2\hfill & n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}\hfill \\ & L=K,K+1,K+2,\mathrm{}\hfill & \end{array}`$ (91)
The parity is $`P=()^K`$. The vibrational band $`(1,0^0)`$ has the same angular momenta $`L^P=0^+,2^+,3^{},4^\pm ,\mathrm{}`$ , as the ground state band $`(0,0^0)`$, while the angular momentum content of the doubly degenerate vibration $`(0,1^1)`$ is given by $`L^P=1^{},2^{},3^{},\mathrm{}`$ . Combining all results one can write an approximate expression for the energy eigenvalues fo the oblate symmetric top

$`E(v_1,v_2^\mathrm{}_2,K,L,M)`$ $`=`$ $`E_0+\omega _1(v_1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})+\omega _2(v_2+1)`$ (92)
$`+\kappa _1L(L+1)+\kappa _2(K2\mathrm{}_2)^2.`$
In Fig. 4 we show the structure of the spectrum of the oblate top according to the approximate energy formula of Eq. (92). The energy spectrum consists of a series of rotational bands labeled by $`(v_1,v_2^\mathrm{}_2)`$ and $`K`$. The degeneracy between states with different values of $`K`$ can be split by the last term in Eq. (92).

## 6 Transition probabilities

In order to calculate transition form factors in the algebraic cluster model one has to express the transition operator in terms of the algebraic operators. In the large $`N`$ limit, the $`U(7)`$ dipole operators $`\widehat{D}_\rho `$ and $`\widehat{D}_\lambda `$ of Eq. (65) correspond to the Jacobi coordinates . The matrix elements of $`\mathrm{exp}(iq\sqrt{2/3}\lambda _z)`$ can be obtained algebraically by making the replacement

$`\sqrt{2/3}\lambda _z`$ $``$ $`\beta \widehat{D}_{\lambda ,z}/X_D,`$ (93)
where $`\beta `$ represents the scale of the coordinate and $`X_D`$ is given by the reduced matrix element of the dipole operator . In summary, the transition form factors can be expressed in the ACM as

$`(if;q)`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma _f,L_f,M|\widehat{T}|\gamma _i,L_i,M,`$ (94)
with

$`\widehat{T}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{iϵ\widehat{D}_{\lambda ,z}}=e^{iq\beta \widehat{D}_{\lambda ,z}/X_D}.`$ (95)
For the general ACM Hamiltonian of Eq. (58), the form factors cannot be obtained in closed analytic form, but have to be calculated numerically. Hereto, a computer program has been developed , in which the form factors are obtained exactly by using the symmetry properties of the transition operator of Eq. (95) (see Appendix D of ).

### 6.1 Dynamic symmetries

When a dynamic symmetry occurs the matrix elements of the transition operators can be obtained in explicit analytic form. The general procedure to derive the transition form factors in the $`U(6)`$ and $`SO(7)`$ limits has been discussed in .

In the $`U(6)`$ limit, the elastic form factor is given by

$`(0_1^+0_1^+;q)`$ $`=`$ $`(\mathrm{cos}ϵ)^Ne^{q^2\beta ^2/6}.`$ (96)
In the last step we have taken the large $`N`$ limit, such that $`ϵX_D=ϵ\sqrt{3N}=q\beta `$ remains finite. For the extended charge distribution, the form factor of Eq. (96) is multiplied by a Gaussian $`\mathrm{exp}(q^2/4\alpha )`$. The coefficients $`\beta `$ and $`\alpha `$ cannot be determined independently, since both have the same dependence on $`q^2`$. The charge radius can be used to fix one particular combination

$`r^2^{1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2\alpha }}+\beta ^2}.`$ (97)
In Table 2 we show the results for some transition form factors in the $`U(6)`$ limit of the ACM. In the large $`N`$ limit, they reduce to those obtained for the harmonic oscillator of Table 1. All form factors exhibit an exponential fall-off with momentum transfer. In Fig. 5 we show the elastic form factor in the large $`N`$ limit (solid line). The coefficients $`\beta `$ and $`\alpha `$ were taken to give the charge radius of 12C: $`r^2^{1/2}=2.468`$ fm . The corresponding charge distribution shows an exponential decay with $`r`$ (solid line in Fig. 6).

For the $`SO(7)`$ symmetry, the transition form factors can be expressed in terms of Gegenbauer polynomials or, equivalently, hypergeometric funcions. For the elastic form factor we have

$`(0_1^+0_1^+;q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4!N!}{(N+4)!}}C_N^{(5/2)}(\mathrm{cos}ϵ)`$ (98)
$`=`$ $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}({\displaystyle \frac{N}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{N+5}{2}},3;\mathrm{sin}^2ϵ){\displaystyle \frac{4J_2(q\beta \sqrt{2})}{q^2\beta ^2}}.`$
The normalization constant is given by $`X_D=\sqrt{N(N+5)/2}`$. Again, in the last step we have taken the large $`N`$ limit, such that $`ϵX_D=q\beta `$ remains finite. The $`SO(7)`$ transition form factors are presented in Table 3. In the large $`N`$ limit, they reduce to those obtained for the deformed oscillator of Table 1. All form factors exhibit an oscillatory behavior. The transition form factor to the first excited $`0^+`$ state which belongs to a vibrational excitation $`v=(N\omega )/2=1`$ vanishes identically, since the dipole operator is a generator of $`SO(7)`$. In Fig. 5 we show the elastic form factor for $`N\mathrm{}`$ (dashed line). The values of $`\beta `$ and $`\alpha `$ are taken to reproduce the minimum in the elastic form factor of 12C at $`q^2=3.4`$ fm-2, and the 12C charge radius of $`2.468`$ fm. The corresponding charge distribution for the deformed oscillator is given by the dashed line in Fig. 6.

### 6.2 Oblate symmetric top

For the oblate symmetric top, the form factors can only be obtained in closed form in the large $`N`$ limit  (see Table 1). As an example, the elastic form factor has been obtained as

$`(0_1^+0_1^+;q)`$ $``$ $`j_0(q\beta ).`$ (99)
In this case, the normalization constant is given by $`X_D=NR\sqrt{2}/(1+R^2)`$. As can be seen from the last column of Table 1, all form factors show an oscillatory behavior. In Fig. 5 we show the elastic form factor in the large $`N`$ limit (dotted line). The coefficients $`\beta `$ and $`\alpha `$ have been determined to give the same value of the minimum and the charge radius as for the deformed oscillator. The charge distribution for the oblate top is given by Eq. (53), and is represented by the dotted line in Fig. 6.

The transition form factors for vibrational excitations are proportional to the corresponding intrinsic transition matrix elements $`\chi _1`$ and $`\chi _2`$ for each type of vibration $`v_1`$ and $`v_2`$, respectively

$`\chi _1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1R^2}{2R\sqrt{N}}},`$
$`\chi _2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1+R^2}}{R\sqrt{2N}}}.`$ (100)
In Fig. 7 we show the inelastic form factor $`|(0_1^+0_2^+;q)|^2`$ for different values of $`R^2`$. As before, the coefficients $`\beta `$ and $`\alpha `$ are determined by the first minimum of the elastic form factor and the charge radius. Whereas the elastic form factor does not depend on $`R^2`$, the inelastic form factor is very sensitive to the value of $`R^2`$, especially with respect to the position of its minimum.

## 7 The nucleus 12C

The structure of 12C has been extensively investigated since the early days of Nuclear Physics. Comprehensive calculations of 12C have been done within the framework of the shell model, starting with the early calculation of Cohen and Kurath  in the $`p`$-shell and ending with the more recent calculations with large shell mixing. 12C has also been the battleground for investigations within the framework of the microscopic cluster model. Here we investigate the extent to which properties of the low-lying spectrum of 12C can be described in terms of the macroscopic cluster model. The reason why a detailed analysis is now feasible is two-fold. First,we have a set of explicit analytic formulas for energies, electromagnetic transition rates and form factors for the oblate top that can be easily be compared with experiments. Second and foremost is that the development of the algebraic cluster model (ACM) allows us to study in a straighforward way complex situations, such as those that are not rigid, but correspond for example to situations which are intermediate between two limiting cases.

The differences between the three special solutions of the ACM, the $`U(6)`$ limit, the $`SO(7)`$ limit and the oblate top, are most pronounced in the transition form factors. The elastic form factor of 12C shows a minimum at $`q^2=3.4`$ fm-2 and no further structure up to about $`q^214`$ fm-2. Also the inelastic form factor for the transition $`0_1^+0_2^+`$ shows a clear minimum at $`q^2=4.5`$ fm-2. The analysis of the form factors that was presented in the previous section shows clearly that only the oblate top scenario can account for the features of the empirical form factors of 12C. In the $`U(6)`$ limit the form factors drop off exponentially and have no minima, whereas in the $`SO(7)`$ limit the inelastic form factor vanishes identically.

Therefore, in this section we analyze the spectroscopy of 12C in the oblate top limit of the ACM.

### 7.1 Energies

The Hamiltonian for the oblate top is given by Eq. (68). The coefficients $`\xi _1`$, $`\xi _2`$, $`\kappa _1`$ and $`\kappa _2`$ are determined in a fit to the excitation energies of 12C (see Table 4). The number of bosons is taken to be $`N=10`$. In Fig. 8 we show a comparison between the experimental data and the calculated states of the oblate top with energies $`<15`$ MeV. One can clearly identify in the experimental spectrum the states $`0^+`$, $`2^+`$, $`3^{}`$, $`4^+`$ of the ground rotational band, the state $`0^+`$ of the stretching vibration and the state $`1^{}`$ of the bending vibration. However, the $`3^{}`$ state does not fall at the location expected from a rigid extended configuration with moments of inertia given by Eq. (7), but at a higher excitation energy. Since the $`3^{}`$ state has $`K=3`$ the deviation from the simple rotational formula indicates large rotation-vibration interactions. This conclusion is strengthened by the low location of the stretching vibration. In contrast with molecules, the vibrational and rotational frequencies in nuclei appear to be comparable. If one takes as a measure of the ratio $`E_{\mathrm{vib}}/E_{\mathrm{rot}}`$ the quantity $`E_{0_2^+}/E_{2_1^+}`$, this quantity is $`1.7`$ in 12C and $`10`$ in a typical molecule with $`𝒟_{3h}`$ symmetry (for example, ozone O3).

### 7.2 Form factors and transition rates

Form factors for electron scattering on 12C have been measured long ago. For the extended charge distribution of Eq. (23), the form factors are obtained by multiplying the oblate top form factors by an exponential factor $`\mathrm{exp}(q^2/4\alpha )`$ (compare Eqs. (20) and (24)). The coefficient $`\beta `$ is determined from the first minimum in the elastic form factor at $`q^2=3.4`$ fm-2  to be $`\beta =1.74`$ fm, and subsequently the coefficient $`\alpha `$ is determined from the charge radius of 12C, $`r^2^{1/2}=2.468\pm 0.012`$ fm , to be $`\alpha =0.52`$ fm-2. If the alpha-particles would not be effected by the presence of the others, the coefficient $`\alpha `$ should be the same as for free particles. The value of $`\alpha `$ is slightly different from the one used in , where it was determined from the maximum in the elastic form factor.

In Fig. 9 we show a comparison between experimental and theoretical form factors calculated exactly using the Hamiltonian of Eq. (68). The value of the parameters of the Hamiltonian and the transition operator is given in Table 4. We note that the transition form factors are calculated with the same values of coefficients $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ as determined from the elastic form factor. Whereas for the rotational excitations the calculations seem to give a good description of the experimental data, the situation is different for vibrational excitations. Although the $`q`$ dependence of the vibrational form factors is consistent with experiment, indicating that the $`0_2^+`$ and $`1_1^{}`$ excited states could indeed be the vibrational excitations of a three-alpha configuration with $`𝒟_{3h}`$ symmetry, their observed large strength implies a very large mixing with other configurations. The strengths of these excitations are proportional to the corresponding intrinsic transition matrix elements $`\chi _1`$ and $`\chi _2`$ for each type of vibration $`v_1`$ and $`v_2`$, respectively . According to Eq. (100), the coefficients $`\chi _1`$ and $`\chi _2`$ go to zero in the large $`N`$ limit (rigid configurations). For finite values of $`N`$, the vibrational transition form factors are different from zero. The solid lines in Figs. 9 were obtained in calculations for a finite value of $`N=10`$.

From the form factors one can extract other electromagnetic properties of interest. The ground state charge distribution can be obtained by taking the Fourier transform of the elastic form factor according to Eq. (52). In Fig. 10 we compare the charge distribution of 12C obtained from the calculated elastic form factor of Fig. 9 and extracted in a Fourier-Bessel analysis of the experimental data .

The $`B(EL)`$ values correspond to the long wavelength limit of the form factors (see Eq. (50)). The values extracted from the fit to the form factors are shown in Table 5. For the monopole strength, instead of $`B(E0)`$ it is customary to give the matrix element $`M(E0)`$. While the $`B(E2;2_1^+0_1^+)`$ and $`B(E3;3_1^{}0_1^+)`$ values are in reasonable agreement, both the $`B(E2;0_2^+2_1^+)`$ and $`M(E0;0_2^+0_1^+)`$ deviate by an order of magnitude. This again may indicate that the nature of the $`0_2^+`$ is not that of a vibrational mode.

## 8 Conclusions

In this article, we have presented a detailed analysis of a configuration composed of three alpha particles at the vertices of an equilateral triangle. We have done so in a classical, quantum and quantum algebraic description. The formulas that have been derived have been used to study the ground state configuration of 12C. In addition, we have introduced a new method to study clustering based on the algebraic quantization of the Jacobi variables. The latter method is very general and it allows to describe in a relatively simple fashion not only three particles at the vertices of a triangle (oblate top) but also other situations such as six-dimensional vibrations and rotational-vibrational spectra.

Our analysis of the experimental data for 12C appears to indicate that the triangular configuration describes the data (energy levels and form factors) reasonably well for the rotational band $`0_1^+`$, $`2_1^+`$, $`3_1^{}`$, $`4_1^+`$, although with large rotation-vibration interactions. The situation is different for the vibrational excitations $`0_2^+`$ and $`1_1^{}`$. Here the shape of the form factors is well reproduced but its magnitude is not.

We bring attention to the quantum algebraic description in terms of the algebra of $`U(7)`$ that is capable of describing not only rigid like structures but also floppy structures. We point out that this method is very general and can describe other situations, as, for example, three alpha particles on a line. These configurations cannot describe the low-lying experimental spectrum of 12C since for three alpha particles on a line there are (in the ground rotational band) no negative parity states. They may occur as excited configurations. Their properties will be presented in a forthcoming publication. The crucial problem in clustering in nuclei is to understand what type of configurations are present, if any, and to provide unambiguous experimental evidence for these configurations. The algebraic method gives a way in which all calculations can be performed easily.

Finally, the general algebraic framework based on the spectrum generating algebra $`U(7)`$ also allows to describe clustering phenomena for three different particles . This description is relevant to giant trinuclear molecules in ternary cold fission .

## Acknowledgements

It is a pleasure to thank Aurora Tumino for her help in calculating the form factors of 12C. This work was supported in part by CONACyT under project 32416-E, and by DPAGA under project IN106400, and by D.O.E. Grant DE-FG02-91ER40608.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The interest in a consistent analysis of the effects of the pion cloud on nucleon properties is nurtured by two areas of recent research. For one, the extrapolation of nucleon lattic data, quenched or unquenched, to physical values of the quark (or pion) mass is mainly determined by pionic effects . Furthermore, these effects will pose constraints on the development of covariant nucleon models such as those presented in Refs. . The most basic observable of interest is the nucleon mass or, more precisely, the nucleon mass shift associated with the pion cloud. In a previous study , the connection of covariant Euclidean nucleon mass shift calculations to extant results from the Cloudy Bag Model (CBM)  and Chiral Perturbation Theory ($`\chi `$PT)  was analyzed. A nonperturbative analysis using the Dyson–Schwinger (DS) equation in rainbow approximation (with no renormalization) suggested that almost all of the nucleon mass shift can be attributed to the covariant one–loop pion dressing. We will extend this analysis by supplementing the DS equation with correct on–shell renormalization conditions (Section 2). To properly implement those, one has to forgo an angular approximation employed in Ref. . In Section 3 we calculate a one–loop correction to the $`\pi NN`$ vertex which is subsequently employed in the DS equation. In the last section, we summarize and present our conclusions.

## 2 The model

We consider a pseudovector Lagrangian for the $`\pi N`$ interaction which reads in Euclidean space

$`_{\pi NN}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2M_N}}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}i\gamma ^\mu \gamma _5𝝉\mathrm{\Psi }(_\mu 𝝅).`$ (1)
The DS equation for the nucleon propagator $`G`$ is given by

$`G^1(p)`$ $`=`$ $`G_0^1(p)+ip/\mathrm{\Sigma }_V(p^2)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_S(p^2),`$ (2)
$`ip/A(p^2)+B(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`Z_2(ip/+Z_MM)+Z_1{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^0G(k)\mathrm{\Gamma }D(pk),`$
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }^0`$ $`=`$ $`(p/k/)\gamma _5𝝉g.`$ (3)
Because of the small mass of the pion, we can approximate the full pion propagator $`D(q)`$ by the free scalar propagator, $`D^0(q)=(q^2+m_\pi ^2)^1`$. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ stand for the free and the full $`\pi NN`$ vertex. The renormalization constants $`Z_1`$, $`Z_2`$ and $`Z_M`$ refer to the $`\pi NN`$ vertex, nucleon wave function and nucleon mass respectively. The relation to bare quantities is given by

$`g={\displaystyle \frac{Z_2}{Z_1}}g_{\mathrm{bare}},M_N={\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{bare}}}{Z_M}}.`$ (4)
To account for the compositeness of the particles, we introduce a form factor at each $`\pi NN`$ vertex into this idealized field–theoretic model,

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{[0]}(p,k)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{[0]}(p,k)u((pk)^2).`$ (5)
In the case where both nucleons are on shell ($`p^2=k^2=M_N^2`$), this form factor is most naturally related to the axial form factor of the nucleon. It is commonly parameterized as a dipole,

$`u(q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^2m_\pi ^2}{\lambda ^2+q^2}}\right)^2,`$ (6)
but we will also investigate (as in Ref. ) the exponential form

$`u_{\mathrm{exp}}(q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q^2+m_\pi ^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}}\right).`$ (7)
From neutrino scattering experiments, the dipole width parameter (in the on–shell case) is determined as $`\lambda =1.03\pm 0.04`$ GeV . This sets roughly the scale for our considerations.

Even after the introduction of form factors, we assume that it is sensible to extract nonperturbative information from the DS equation (2). We note that now the loop integral in the equation is convergent and all renormalization constants will therefore be finite. A commonly used approximation to it is the rainbow approximation $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{\Gamma }^0`$. The full $`\pi NN`$ vertex $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ fulfills its own DS equation which takes the symbolic form:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`Z_1\mathrm{\Gamma }^0+\mathrm{\Gamma }^0(G^{[1]}G^{[2]})K_4.`$ (8)
Here, $`K_4`$ is the full, off-shell, amputated $`NN`$ scattering matrix. One sees that the rainbow approximation neglects the last term and enforces $`Z_1=1`$.

We employ on–shell renormalization for the unknown nucleon propagator, $`G`$. This requires that $`G`$ has a pole at $`p^2=M_N^2`$ (the physical mass),

$`M_N(Z_2+\mathrm{\Sigma }_V(M_N^2))`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_S(M_N^2)+Z_2Z_MM_N,`$ (9)
$`M_{\mathrm{bare}}M_N=M_N(Z_M1)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z_2}}(M_N\mathrm{\Sigma }_V(M_N^2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_S(M_N^2)).`$ (10)
The renormalization constant $`Z_2`$ is determined by the condition that the residue at the pole be unity,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{G^1}{(ip/)}}|_{ip/=M_N}`$ $`=`$ $`1`$ (11)
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_V(M_N^2)+2M_N^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_V}{p^2}}|_{p^2=M_N^2}2M_N{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_S}{p^2}}|_{p^2=M_N^2}`$ $`=`$ $`Z_21.`$ (12)
Mass renormalization ensures that the self–energy has cuts starting from the physical thresholds. Furthermore one can show that the spectral densities of the solution $`G`$ multiplied by $`Z_2`$ are properly normalized (i.e. $`Z_2`$ can be interpreted as the probability of finding a “bare” nucleon inside the pion–dressed one).

In the exploratory study  the DS equation, Eq. (2), was solved in rainbow approximation after putting $`Z_1=Z_2=Z_M=1`$ and disregarding the above renormalization conditions. The mass of the dressed nucleon was then found as the solution of $`M_D^2A(M_D^2)+B(M_D^2)=0`$, $`M_D<M_N`$. In this simplified scenario it was possible to employ a certain angular approximation to the loop integral in eq. (2) to calculate all angular integrals analytically. However, if one incorporates the renormalization conditions (10) and (12), this angular approximation fails because it underestimates the slopes of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_V`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_S`$ considerably (and these enter the expression for $`Z_2`$). As a result, we must resort to a numerical computation of one angular integral. Since we have to evaluate the renormalization conditions on the nucleon mass shell, it is necessary to continue the DS equation to complex momenta. This intricate procedure is outlined in Appendix A.

We illustrate the results for the mass shift in Fig. 1, employing (as in Ref. ) as the renormalized coupling constant $`g=M_N/f_\pi `$, i.e. $`g_A=1`$. We chose a dipole form factor with cut-offs $`\lambda `$ in a range compatible with the measured axial form factor.111For technical reasons we consider only $`\lambda >M_N`$. Otherwise poles from the form factor enter the integration domain, adding technical complications which are of no interest here. Indeed, the mass shift for the unrenormalized rainbow treatment and the one in one–loop approximation are very close. In contrast, the mass shift in the renormalized rainbow treatment is larger by a factor which rises from 1.8 ($`\lambda =0.96`$ GeV) to 2.9 ($`\lambda =1.2`$ GeV). The explanation for this peculiar behaviour can be found in the right panel of Fig. 1 where the ratio of bare to renormalized coupling is plotted. This ratio equals $`1/Z_2`$ in the rainbow treatment and is considerably larger than 1. If one divides the DS equation, Eq. (2), by $`Z_2`$, one sees that the loop integral is proportional to the bare coupling and therefore drives the mass shift to larger absolute values.

A repetition of the calculations with the physical $`g_A=1.26`$ only aggravates the difference between renormalized and unrenormalized results. Whereas the mass shift in the unrenormalized rainbow treatment scales with $`g_A^2`$ (as the one-loop result), the mass shift in the renormalized case shoots up to values between 400 MeV and 1.9 GeV (depending on $`\lambda `$), because of the nonlinear nature of the DS equation.

The question arises whether such a strong renormalization of the pion–nucleon coupling constant, as visible in the rainbow solutions, is physically reasonable. An analysis of pionic corrections to nucleons in the CBM to one–loop order  reveals that $`Z_1Z_2`$ (and therefore $`g_{\mathrm{bare}}g`$) if one includes the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonance in the analysis of the self–energies and the pion–nucleon vertex.222The analysis there corresponds to a non–relativistic expansion of positive–energy graphs in time–ordered perturbation theory. This is a strong indication that the rainbow approximation is unreliable for this problem: there $`Z_1=1`$ is set artificially and $`Z_20.6\mathrm{}0.7`$ for physical $`\pi NN`$ form factors.

Therefore, we will model the full $`\pi NN`$ vertex $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ by the bare one plus a one-loop correction that includes the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in an effective manner, i.e. as a spin–3/2 particle described by Rarita–Schwinger spinors. Ideally, we would like to employ self–consistent propagators of $`N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in this study, but solving a coupled system of two–loop DS equations for $`N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is beyond the scope of this study. Instead, we pursue a modest but nevertheless resource–consuming modification: the one–loop vertex correction to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ will be calculated using free $`N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ propagators and the result will be inserted back into the DS eq. (2). By that token, the problem becomes numerically tractable, and we expect the bulk of the effect on the solutions to be buried in a reasonable estimate for $`Z_1`$.

## 3 Corrections to the $`\pi NN`$ vertex

We calculate the covariant one–loop correction to the $`\pi NN`$ vertex by including the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ as an effective degree of freedom. Pictorially the equation for the vertex is displayed in Fig. 2, and as mentioned above we take for the nucleon and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ propagators free spin–1/2 and spin–3/2 propagators, respectively,

$`G^0(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ip/+M_N}{p^2+M_N^2}},`$ (13)
$`G_\mathrm{\Delta }^{0,\mu \nu }(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ip/+M_\mathrm{\Delta }}{p^2+M_\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}^{\mu \nu },`$ (14)
$`^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`\delta ^{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu +{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{p^\mu p^\nu }{M_\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{i}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{p^\mu \gamma ^\nu p^\nu \gamma ^\mu }{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}},`$ (15)
with $`M_N=0.94`$ GeV and $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }=1.23`$ GeV are the physical masses of both particles. For the $`\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }`$ interactions we employ tree level vertices derived from the simplest covariant interaction Lagrangians, i.e.,

$`_{\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g_{\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }}}{2M_N}}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^\mu 𝑻_{1/2}^{3/2}\mathrm{\Psi }(_\mu 𝝅)+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }}^0={\displaystyle \frac{g_{\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }}}{2M_N}}iq^\mu 𝑻_{1/2}^{3/2},`$ (16)
$`_{\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g_{\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }}}{2M_N}}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^\rho i\gamma ^\mu \gamma _5𝑻_{3/2}^{3/2}\mathrm{\Psi }^\rho (_\mu 𝝅)\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }}^0={\displaystyle \frac{g_{\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }}}{2M_N}}q/\gamma _5𝑻_{3/2}^{3/2}.`$ (17)
Here $`q`$ is the momentum of the incoming pion. For the isospin 1/2–3/2 transition matrix we adopt the convention

$`𝑻_{1/2}^{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`C_{\frac{1}{2}m,1k}^{\frac{3}{2}M}.`$ (18)
As indices in the Clebsch–Gordan coefficient, $`M,m,k`$ stand for the isospin–$`z`$ components of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`N`$ and $`𝝅`$. Furthermore, the isospin matrices $`𝑻_{3/2}^{3/2}`$ are just the ones for the 4–dimensional $`SU(2)`$ representation.

For the numerical values of the coupling constants $`g_{\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ and $`g_{\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ we relate them to $`g`$ via $`SU(6)`$ quark model expressions. This of course leaves room to fine–tuning which is not the main interest here. To apply the quark model, we note the non–relativistic limit of both vertices,

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }}^0`$ $``$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{g_{\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }}}{2M_N}}𝑻_{1/2}^{3/2}(𝑺_{1/2}^{3/2}𝒒),`$ (19)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }}^0`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2i}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_{\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }}}{2M_N}}𝑻_{3/2}^{3/2}(𝑺_{3/2}^{3/2}𝒒).`$ (20)
The transition matrix $`𝑺_{1/2}^{3/2}`$ is identical to $`𝑻_{1/2}^{3/2}`$, it just refers to the spin degree of freedom. Comparing to the expressions in Ref. , we readily find

$`g_{\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{72}{25}}}g,`$ (21)
$`g_{\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{6}{5}}g.`$ (22)
Here, we employ for the renormalized coupling constant the physical value $`g=g_AM_N/f_\pi `$ with $`g_A=1.26`$. Having fixed the strength of our interactions, we proceed now to the calculation of the renormalization constant $`Z_1`$. We choose to fix it at the virtual point where both nucleons and the pion are on shell, i.e.

$`\overline{u}(k)\mathrm{\Gamma }u(p)`$ $`\stackrel{!}{=}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2M_N}}\overline{u}(k)(k/p/)\gamma _5u(p)`$ (24)
$`\left[p^2=k^2=M_N^2,(pk)^2=m_\pi ^2\right].`$
This has the advantage that the $`\pi NN`$ form factor should reduce to 1 at this point.

The resulting $`Z_1`$ as a function of the dipole cut–off is plotted in Fig. 3. From the right panel one can see that the loop–nucleons contribute less than 0.05 to $`1Z_1`$. If this were the whole story, the rainbow treatment of the DS equation would seem to be justified, yielding mass-shifts $`>500`$ MeV as demonstrated before! The bulk of the difference $`1Z_1`$ comes from the two graphs with one intermediate $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The resulting bare coupling is somewhat lower than the renormalized one. If the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ were also included in the nucleon self–energy, we would expect a somewhat larger bare coupling since its contribution lowers $`Z_2`$ additionally. Keeping that in mind, we expect the present results for the mass shift in the improved DS equation to be a lower bound.

Our one–loop improved model for the vertex can now be inserted into the DS eq. (2). Technically, we proceed by projecting the Dirac structure of the vertex onto basic covariant matrices,

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{Dirac}}(p,k,l)`$ $`=`$ $`(i\gamma _5)V_1(p^2,k^2,pk)+(p/\gamma _5)V_2(p^2,k^2,pk)+`$ (25)
$`(k/_\mathrm{T}\gamma _5)V_3(p^2,k^2,pk)+(ik/_\mathrm{T}p/\gamma _5)V_4(p^2,k^2,pk),`$
$`k_\mathrm{T}`$ $`=`$ $`kp{\displaystyle \frac{kp}{p^2}},`$ (26)
from which the scalar functions $`V_{1\mathrm{}4}`$ can be readily traced out, using the program FORM . The three remaining scalar integrals are evaluated numerically. We calculate the functions $`V_i`$ on a three–dimensional grid in the variables $`p^2`$, $`k^2`$ and $`\widehat{p}\widehat{k}`$, needed for the solution of the DS equation.

The results for mass-shift and the wave–function renormalization constant $`Z_2`$ are depicted in Fig. 4. In the physically interesting region $`\lambda [0.95,1.05]`$ GeV the mass shift stays rather flat, at a value around 200 MeV. For a harder form factor it actually drops, which can again be explained by looking at the ratio $`g_{\mathrm{bare}}/g`$: beyond $`\lambda 1.1`$ GeV $`g_{\mathrm{bare}}/g`$ is becomes less than 1/2. As explained before, this ratio enters the pion loop integral in the DS equation through $`Z_1`$. Since $`Z_1`$ itself is very low there, the one–loop treatment of the $`\pi NN`$ vertex can be questioned.

The feature of a plateau in the mass shift for a certain range of cut–off parameters (which happens to coincide with the experimental results for the axial form factor) is actually a desired one in effective models with cut–off functions, since it indicates the relative independence of the results on the specific choice of cut–off. Whether that still holds after self–consistent inclusion of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonance is an open question. Certainly, by the arguments given above, its proper inclusion should lead to $`g_{\mathrm{bare}}/g>1`$ and a larger mass shift. Keeping this in mind, a value $`\delta M\delta M_{1\mathrm{loop}}200`$ MeV constitutes a lower bound.

In Fig. 5 we show the results for an exponential $`\pi NN`$ form factor. Since the exponential is an entire function, we can investigate also somewhat softer form factors without encountering analytical problems. One–loop mass shifts are the same for dipole and exponential, if $`\lambda 1.2\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The result for the self–consistent mass–shift looks overall very similar to the previous case. Its curve flattens around $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.8`$ GeV at a value of approximately 190 MeV and then drops because of the rapidly decreasing bare coupling constant.

## 4 Summary and Conclusions

We have investigated the covariant Dyson–Schwinger equation for the nucleon in a field–theoretic model for the pion–nucleon interaction with a pseudovector Lagrangian. Its treatment in the commonly used rainbow approximation, including proper renormalization, leads to a strong renormalization of the pion–nucleon coupling constant, $`g_{\mathrm{bare}}/g>1`$, in contradiction to perturbative one–loop calculations. We were therefore led to calculate the one–loop perturbative correction to the vertex, including the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonance, and to re–solve the DS equation. For physically reasonable values for the cut–off in the dipole pion–nucleon form factor, $`\lambda 1`$ GeV, we find $`g_{\mathrm{bare}}/g1`$ and a rather stable value for the nucleon mass–shift of around $`200`$ MeV, consistent with one–loop results in both covariant treatments and semi–relativistic approaches such as the cloudy bag model. The fully self–consistent inclusion of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonance is expected to raise the absolute value of the mass shift even further.

## Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Australian Research Council, the University of Adelaide and by the grant of a Feoder Lynen Fellowship (M.O.) from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.

## Appendix A Solving the Dyson–Schwinger equation for complex momenta

Here we present a more detailed account of the procedure to solve the DS eq. (2),

$`ip/A(p^2)+B(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`Z_2(ip/+Z_MM)+ip/\mathrm{\Sigma }_V(p^2)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_S(p^2),`$ (27)
$`ip/\mathrm{\Sigma }_V(p^2)+\mathrm{\Sigma }_S(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`Z_1{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^0(pk)\times `$ (28)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ik/A(k^2)+B(k^2)}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(p,k)D^0(pk).`$
In order to evaluate the renormalization conditions (10,12), we will need (as shown below) the functions $`A(p^2)`$ and $`B(p^2)`$ for $`p^2[(M_Nm_\pi )^2,\mathrm{})`$ – i.e. if $`p=(\mathrm{𝟎},p_4)`$, $`p_4`$ may assume imaginary values.

We introduce the two component vectors $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(p^2)=(\mathrm{\Sigma }_S(p^2),\mathrm{\Sigma }_V(p^2))`$ and $`S(p^2)=(A(p^2),B(p^2))`$. After applying suitable traces and doing the two trivial angular integrals we arrive at an equation of the form

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^2dk^2}{k^2A^2(k^2)+B^2(k^2)}}\times `$
$`{\displaystyle _1^1}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1z^2}dz}{p^2+k^2+m_\pi ^22p_4|k|z}}K_{ij}(p^2,k^2,z)S_j(k^2),`$
where $`z=\mathrm{cos}\psi `$ refers to the angle between the Euclidean vectors $`p`$ and $`k`$. If we want to evaluate the loop integral for $`p^2<0`$ ($`p_4`$ imaginary), we have to note that for $`p^2+m_\pi ^2<0`$ poles from the pion propagator cross the real $`k_4`$ axis. These have to be avoided by a suitable deformation of the integration contour. This situation is depicted in Fig. 6. Alternatively, the original real path may be retained provided that a loop contour around the poles is added. This leads to

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^2dk^2}{k^2A^2(k^2)+B^2(k^2)}}\times `$ (30)
$`{\displaystyle _1^1}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1z^2}dz}{p^2+k^2+m_\pi ^22p_4k_4z}}K_{ij}(p^2,k^2,z)S_j(k^2)+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{(2\pi )^3}}\theta (p^2m_\pi ^2){\displaystyle _{\mathrm{poles}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3𝒌}{2\sqrt{𝒌^2+m_\pi ^2}}}\times `$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{K_{ij}(p^2,k^2,z)}{k^2A^2(k^2)+B^2(k^2)}}S_j(k^2)|_{(pk)^2=m_\pi ^2}.`$
The loop contour in $`k_4`$ picks up residues $`(2\pi i)/(2i\sqrt{𝒌^2+m_\pi ^2})`$ from the pion propagator, and the integrand for the remaining integral in 3–space has to be evaluated at the pion poles (thus the value of $`z`$ to be used in $`K_{ij}`$ is determined). We convert the integral over $`𝒌`$ into an integral over the squared four–momentum $`k^2`$ using

$`d𝒌^2{\displaystyle \frac{|𝒌|}{2\sqrt{𝒌^2+m_\pi ^2}}}`$ $`=`$ $`dk^2k^2F(k^2,p^2),`$ (31)
$`F(k^2,p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{(k^2+p^2+m_\pi ^2)^24k^2p^2}}{4k^2p^2}}.`$ (32)
Hence, we arrive at the final expression for the self–energies, valid also for timelike momenta up to $`p^2=M_N^2`$:

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i(p^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^2dk^2}{k^2A^2(k^2)+B^2(k^2)}}\times `$ (33)
$`{\displaystyle _1^1}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{1z^2}dz}{p^2+k^2+m_\pi ^22p_4k_4z}}K_{ij}(p^2,k^2,z)S_j(k^2)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{(2\pi )^2}}\theta (p^2m_\pi ^2){\displaystyle _{\left(\sqrt{p^2}m_\pi \right)^2}^{p^2m_\pi ^2}}k^2F(k^2,p^2)dk^2\times `$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{K_{ij}(p^2,k^2,z)}{k^2A^2(k^2)+B^2(k^2)}}S_j(k^2)|_{(pk)^2=m_\pi ^2}.`$
Now one sees clearly that in order to evaluate the renormalization conditions at $`p^2=M_N^2`$, one needs to know the self–consistent solution to $`A(p^2)`$ and $`B(p^2)`$ for the interval $`p^2[(M_Nm_\pi )^2,\mathrm{})`$. The DS equation can now be solved iteratively, performing both $`z`$ and $`k^2`$ integrations numerically. By virtue of the pion–nucleon form factors, the numerical treatment is not hampered by ultraviolet divergences and stable results are achieved by using a mininum of 100 mesh points for each integral.