Origin of the Okubo-Zweig-Iizuka rule in QCD

Physical Review D

Volumn 64, Issue 9, 2001, Pages

  Isgur, Nathan ^a   Thacker, H B ^b  

^a THOMAS JEFFERSON NATIONAL ACCELERATOR FACILITY   (United States)

^b University of Virginia ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CALCULATION; ELEMENTARY PARTICLE; HADRON; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MESON; PHENOMENOLOGY; QUANTUM MECHANICS; QUARK;

EID: 85038303134     PISSN: 05562821     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. G. Zweig, CERN Report No. 8419 TH 412, 1964;
2. reprinted in Developments in the Quark Theory of Hadrons, edited by D. B. Lichtenberg and S. P. Rosen (Hadronic Press, Massachusetts, 1980).
3. The history of the discovery of the quark model (or "aces") as seen by Zweig is related in "Baryon 1980," Proceedings of the IVth International Conference on Baryon Resonances, edited by N. Isgur, Toronto, 1980, p. 439.
4. S. Okubo, Phys. Lett. 5, 165 (1963);
5. Phys. Rev. D 16, 2336 (1977);
6. J. Iizuka, K. Okada, and O. Shito, Prog. Theor. Phys. 35, 1061 (1966);
7. J. Iizuka, Suppl. Prog. Theor. Phys. 37-38, 21 (1966).
8. A. De Rújula, H. Georgi, and S.L. Glashow, Phys. Rev. D 12, 147 (1975).
9. N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D 12, 3770 (1975);
10. N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D 13, 122 (1976).
11. H. Fritzsch and P. Minkowski, Nuovo Cimento A 30, 393 (1975).
12. There is an interesting subtlety associated with this decomposition. Figure 2(b) includes time orderings in which the pair creation occurs before the annihilation (see Fig. 3) corresponding to meson loop processes. However, the complete set of meson loop processes produce not only Fig. 2(b) but also Z graphs of Fig. 2(a) and graphs with closed qq̄ loops inserted into Fig. 2(a). Thus a consistent treatment actually requires that S be not just the simple valence graph shown, but also include graphs with internal qq̄ loops [4].
13. M. Gell-Mann, R.J. Oakes, and B. Renner, Phys. Rev. 175, 2195 (1968);
14. S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D 12, 3583 (1975).
15. Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4, 380 (1960);
16. J. Goldstone, Nuovo Cimento 19, 154 (1961).
17. A.M. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. 59B, 82 (1975);
18. Nucl. Phys. B121, 429 (1977);
19. A.A. Belavin, A.M. Polyakov, A. Schwartz, and Y. Tyupkin, Phys. Lett. 59B, 85 (1975);
20. C. Callan, R. Dashen, and D.J. Gross, Phys. Lett. ibid. 63B, 334 (1976);
21. R. Jackiw and C. Rebbi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 172 (1976).
22. G. 't Hooft, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 8 (1976);
23. Phys. Rev. D 14, 3432 (1976).
24. E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B149, 285 (1979);
25. E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B256, 269 (1979).
26. G. Veneziano, Nucl. Phys. B159, 213 (1979).
27. G. 't Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B72, 461 (1974);
28. E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. ibid. B160, 57 (1979).
29. 2 matrices should such an improvement be justified by an improvement in the relevant experimental data.
30. H.J. Lipkin, Nucl. Phys. B291, 720 (1987);
31. Phys. Lett. B 179, 278 (1986);
32. Nucl. Phys. B244, 147 (1984);
33. Phys. Lett. B124, 509 (1983).
34. There is a loophole in this argument. It is possible that instead there could be a conspiracy between the hadronic loop processes and other sources of OZI violation.
35. P. Geiger and N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D 44, 799 (1991);
36. Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 1066 (1991);
37. Phys. Rev. D 47, 5050 (1993);
38. P. Geiger, Phys. Rev. D ibid. 49, 6003 (1994).
39. L. Micu, Nucl. Phys. B10, 521 (1969);
40. A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, O. Pene, and J.-C. Raynal, Phys. Rev. D 8, 2233 (1973);
41. Phys. Lett. 71B, 397 (1977);
42. Phys. Lett. 72B, 57 (1977);
43. W. Roberts and B. Silvestre-Brac, Few Body Syst. 11, 171 (1992);
44. P. Geiger and E.S. Swanson, Phys. Rev. D 50, 6855 (1994);
45. R. Kokoski and N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D ibid. 35, 907 (1987);
46. Fl. Stancu and P. Stassart, Phys. Rev. D ibid. 38, 233 (1988);
47. Fl. Stancu and P. Stassart, Phys. Rev. D 39, 343 (1989);
48. Fl. Stancu and P. Stassart, Phys. Rev. D 41, 916 (1990);
49. Fl. Stancu and P. Stassart, Phys. Rev. D 42, 1521 (1990);
50. S. Capstick and W. Roberts, Phys. Rev. D ibid. 47, 1994 (1993);
51. S. Capstick and W. Roberts, Phys. Rev. D 49, 4570 (1994);
52. E.S. Ackleh, T. Barnes, and E.S. Swanson, Phys. Rev. D ibid. 54, 6811 (1996);
53. 0 model for mesons, see T. Barnes, F.E. Close, P.R. Page, and E.S. Swanson, Phys. Rev. D ibid. 55, 4157 (1997).
54. C. Schmid, D.M. Webber, and C. Sorensen, Nucl. Phys. B111, 317 (1976);
55. E.L. Berger and C. Sorensen, Phys. Lett. 62B, 303 (1976).
56. ++.
57. Y. Kuramashi, M. Fukugita, H. Mino, M. Okawa, and A. Ukawa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3448 (1994).
58. W. Bardeen, A. Duncan, E. Eichten, and H. Thacker, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 73, 243 (1999).
59. W. Bardeen, A. Duncan, E. Eichten, N. Isgur, and H. Thacker, hep-lat/0106008.
60. W. Bardeen, A. Duncan, E. Eichten, and H. Thacker, Phys. Rev. D 62, 114505 (2000).
61. A.X. El-Khadra, G.M. Hockney, A.S. Kronfeld, and P.B. Mackenzie, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 729 (1992).
62. 0 have (or are predicted to have) very strong S-wave couplings to nearby thresholds. [See, for example, R. Kokoski and N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D 35, 907 (1987);
63. N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D ibid. 57, 4041 (1998).] We have found no other recent lattice measurements of these masses close to the chiral limit (see, however, Ref. [27]), or of other spectroscopic properties of the P-wave mesons, and consequently hope to report on their spectroscopy in a forthcoming publication. In any event, at the level of accuracy relevant to the results reported here, these 10% effects are not significant.
64. UKQCD Collaboration C. Michael, M.S. Foster, and C. McNeile, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 83-84, 185 (2000).
65. W. Lee and D. Weingarten, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 63, 194 (1998);
66. W. Lee and D. Weingarten, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 73, 249 (1999);
67. 0-glueball mixing.
68. c expansion. See G.F. Chew and C. Rosenzweig, Nucl. Phys. B104, 290 (1976);
69. G. Veneziano, in Proc. 9th Ecole d'Eté de Physique des Particules, Gif-sur-Yvette, 1977, Vol. 2, p. 23.
70. R. Dashen and A. Manohar, Phys. Lett. B 315, 425 (1993);
71. R. Dashen and A. Manohar, Phys. Lett. B 315, 438 (1993);
72. R. Dashen, E. Jenkins, and A. Manohar, Phys. Rev. D 49, 4713 (1994);
73. R. Dashen, E. Jenkins, and A. Manohar, Phys. Rev. D 51, 2489 (1995).
74. Elizabeth Jenkins and Richard F. Lebed, Phys. Rev. D 52, 282 (1995).
75. E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B149, 285 (1979) on p. 286.
76. For a review, see T. Schäfer and E. Shuryak, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 323 (1998).
77. For a review, see J. Negele, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 73, 92 (1999).
78. John F. Donoghue and Harald Gomm, Phys. Rev. D 28, 2800 (1983).