Charge symmetry breaking in the valence quark distributions of the nucleon

Physical Review C - Nuclear Physics

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 441-447

  Benesh, C J ^a,b   Goldman, T ^a  

^a LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^b IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031537665     PISSN: 05562813     EISSN: 1089490X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.55.441     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. W. Heisenberg, Z. Phys. 77, 1 (1932)
2. G. A. Miller and W. T. H. van Oers, in Symmetries and Fundamental Interactions in Nuclei, edited by W. Haxton and E. Henley (World Scientific, Singapore, 1996)
3. G. A. Miller, B. Nefkens, and I. Slaus, Phys. Rep.194, 1 (1990)
4. New Muon Collaboration, Nucl. Phys.A577, 325 (1994)
5. Phys. Rev. D50, 1 (1994)
6. Phys. Rev. Lett.66, 2712 (1991)
7. J. Ashman et al., Phys. Lett. B206, 3641 (1988)
8. Nucl. Phys.A328, 1 (1988)
9. Spin Muon Collaboration, A577, 313 (1994)
10. Phys. Lett. B320, 400 (1994)
11. 329, 399 (1994)
12. 357, 248 (1995)
13. P. L. Anthony et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 959 (1993)
14. K. Abe et al., 74, 346 (1995).
15. E. Sather, Phys. Lett. B274, 433 (1992)
16. E. Rodionov, A. W. Thomas, and J. T. Londergan, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A9, 1799 (1994)
17. R. L. Jaffe and G. G. Ross, Phys. Lett.93B, 313 (1980)
18. C. J. Benesh, Mod. Phys. Lett. A9, 849 (1992)
19. S. Kumano, and J. T. Londergan, Comput. Phys. Commun.69, 373 (1992); CPHCBZM. Miyama and S. Kumano, SAGA Report No. SAGA-HE-81-95, hep-ph 9508246
20. R. Kobayashi, M. Konuma, S. Kumano, and M. Miyama, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl.120, 257 (1995)
21. C. J. Benesh punct G. A. Miller, Phys. Rev. D36, 1344 (1987)
22. 38, 48 (1988)
23. Phys. Lett. B215, 381 (1988)
24. A. J. Signal and A. W. Thomas, Phys. Rev. D40, 2832 (1989)
25. A. W. Thomas, Nucl. Phys.A532, 177c (1991)
26. X. M. Wang and X. Song, Phys. Rev. C51, 2750 (1995)
27. W. Melnitchouk and W. Weise, Phys. Lett. B334, 275 (1994)
28. K. Suzuki, T. Shigetani, and H. Toki, Nucl. Phys.A573, 541 (1994)
29. F. Gross and J. Milana, Phys. Rev. D43, 2401 (1991)
30. V. SanJose and V. Vento, Nucl. Phys.A501, 672 (1989)
31. T. Goldman, K. R. Maltman, G. J. Stephenson, Jr., and K. E. Schmidt, Nucl. Phys.A481, 621 (1988)
32. Relaxing this assumption will produce quarks distributions that are larger at small (Formula presented) and at large (Formula presented). Since we do not expect that the magnitude of the CSB effect will be sensitive to this assumption, the CSB ratios are expected to decrease for large and small (Formula presented), and to increase in between. Constructing such an overlap for a linear confining potential, as opposed to a baglike potential, may seem intractable due to infrared divergences. However, such a potential can be described as arising from a scalar field strength distribution that falls off Coulombically at large (Formula presented). Since it is the field strength distribution, not the interaction energy, that is the appropriate object to appear in the empty bag overlap function, the infrared problems disappear. For a discussion of this see T. Goldman, in “Confinement Unstrung,” to appear in the Proceedings of the Workshop on Quark Confinement and the Hadron Spectrum II, Como, Italy, 1996, edited by N. Brambilla (World Scientific, Singapore, in press).
33. R. P. Bickerstaff and A. W. Thomas, Phys. Rev. D25, 1869 (1982)
34. The issue of the consistent definition of (Formula presented) is overlooked in both Refs. 5 and 6, leading to predictions for the CSB effect in the valence distributions which cannot, therefore, be correct. In Ref. 6, there is a legitimate effect due to the additional kinematic role played by the nucleon mass, but, as discussed in the text, such effects are in disagreement with the expectations of light cone physics. We conclude that they are artifacts of the diquark approximation used to completely specify the model kinematics.
35. T. Goldman, K. R. Maltman, and G. J. Stephenson, Jr., Phys. Lett. B228, 396 (1989)
36. See A. S. Goldhaber and T. Goldman, Phys. Lett. B344, 319 (1995), for a detailed discussion of this point
37. H. Spiesberger, Phys. Rev. D52, 4936 (1995)
38. J. T. Londergan, G. T. Garvey, G. Q. Liu, E. N. Rodionov, and A. W. Thomas, Phys. Lett. B340, 115 (1994)
39. C. J. Benesh, T. Goldman, and G. J. Stephenson, Jr., Phys. Rev. C48, 1379 (1993)
40. F. E. Close and A. W. Thomas, Phys. Lett. B212, 229 (1988). PLYBAJ