K-string tensions in [Formula Presented] gauge theories

Physical Review D - Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology

Volumn 65, Issue 2, 2002, Pages

  Del Debbio, Luigi ^a   Panagopoulos, Haralambos ^a   Rossi, Paolo ^a   Vicari, Ettore ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PISA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85038302101     PISSN: 15507998     EISSN: 15502368     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.65.021501     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. V. I. Shevchenko and Yu. A. Simonov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1811 (2000);
2. V. I. ShevchenkoYu. A. Simonovhep-ph/0104135.
3. Y. Koma, E. Ilgenfritz, H. Toki, and T. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. D 64, 011501(R) (2001).
4. G. Bali, Phys. Rev. D 62, 114503 (2000).
5. S. Deldar, Phys. Rev. D 62, 034509 (2000).
6. M. Faber, J. Greensite, and Š. Olejník, Phys. Rev. D 57, 2603 (1998).
7. M. J. Strassler, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 131, 439 (1998);
8. M. J. StrasslerNucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 73, 120 (1999).
9. M. R. Douglas and S. H. Shenker, Nucl. Phys. B447, 271 (1995).
10. A. Hanany, M. J. Strassler, and A. Zaffaroni, Nucl. Phys. B513, 87 (1998).
11. E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B507, 658 (1997).
12. J. Ambjørn, P. Olesen, and C. Peterson, Nucl. Phys. B240, 533 (1984).
13. J. B. Kogut and L. Susskind, Phys. Rev. D 11, 395 (1975).
14. M. Peter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 602 (1997);
15. M. PeterNucl. Phys. B501, 471 (1997);
16. Y. Schröder, Phys. Lett. B 447, 321 (1999).
17. L. Del Debbio, H. Panagopoulos, P. Rossi, and E. Vicari, hep-th/0111090.
18. A. M. Polyakov, Gauge Fields and Strings (Harwood Academic Publishers, New York, 1988).
19. P. Rossi, M. Campostrini, and E. Vicari, Phys. Rep. 302, 143 (1998).
20. E. Abdalla, M. C. B. Abdalla, and A. Lima-Santos, Phys. Lett. 104B, 71 (1984);
21. Phys. Lett.P. Wiegmann, 141B, 173 (1984);
22. Phys. Lett.P. Wiegmann141B, 217 (1984).
23. B. Lucini and M. Teper, Phys. Lett. B 501, 128 (2001);
24. B. LuciniM. TeperJ. High Energy Phys. 06, 050 (2001)
25. M. Wingate and S. Ohta, Phys. Rev. D 63, 094502 (2001).
26. N. Cabibbo and E. Marinari, Phys. Lett. 119B, 387 (1982).
27. In order to compare Monte Carlo results for various values of N, it is useful to introduce the rescaled coupling (Formula presented) which is kept fixed when taking the large-N limit of the lattice theory.
28. M. Creutz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 46, 1441 (1981);
29. G. Bhanot and M. Creutz, Phys. Rev. D 24, 3212 (1981).
30. M. Campostrini, P. Rossi, and E. Vicari, Phys. Rev. D 46, 2647 (1992);
31. Phys. Rev. DM. CampostriniP. RossiE. Vicari46, 4643 (1992);
32. E. Vicari, Phys. Lett. B 309, 139 (1993).
33. P. de Forcrand, G. Schierholz, H. Schneider, and M. Teper, Phys. Lett. 160B, 137 (1985).
34. M. Lüscher, K. Symanzik, and P. Weisz, Nucl. Phys. B173, 365 (1980).
35. M. Teper, Phys. Lett. B 183, 345 (1987);
36. Phys. Lett. BAPE Collaboration, M. Albanese et al., 192, 163 (1987).
37. In order to further check the robustness of our statement concerning the deviation from the Casimir formula, we have analyzed our data using fits which allow for scaling corrections. Of course, for this purpose one must consider all data, including the one at (Formula presented) since it is the only one showing apparent scaling violations. As suggested in Ref. 17, one may fit the data to the linear behavior (Formula presented) The results are (Formula presented) and (Formula presented) respectively with and without the point at the largest value of γ, i.e. (Formula presented) Therefore, if one wants to be more cautious in treating the systematic error due to scaling corrections, one may take into account the linear fits, and arrive at (Formula presented) which covers all the results obtained above. This conservative estimate is still not consistent with the Casimir formula. Thus, our conclusions are fully justified even by this overly cautious analysis.