1 / 41

The nature of the Roper P 11 (1440), S 11 (1535), D 13 (1520), and beyond.

The nature of the Roper P 11 (1440), S 11 (1535), D 13 (1520), and beyond. SU(6)xO(3) Classification of Baryons. D 13 (1520) S 11 (1535). Roper P 11 (1440). The Roper Resonance – what are the issues?. Poorly understood in nrCQMs - Wrong mass ordering (~ 1700 MeV)

feivel
Download Presentation

The nature of the Roper P 11 (1440), S 11 (1535), D 13 (1520), and beyond.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The nature of the Roper P11(1440), S11(1535), D13(1520), and beyond.

  2. SU(6)xO(3) Classification of Baryons D13(1520) S11(1535) Roper P11(1440)

  3. The Roper Resonance – what are the issues? • Poorly understood in nrCQMs • - Wrong mass ordering (~ 1700 MeV) • - nrCQM gives A1/2(Q2=0) > 0, in contrast to experiment which finds A1/2(Q2=0) < 0. • Alternative models: • - Light front kinematics (many predictions) • - Hybrid baryon with gluonic excitation |q3G> (prediction) • - Quark core with large meson cloud |q3m> (prediction) • - Nucleon-sigma molecule |Nm> (no predictions) • - Dynamically generated resonance (no predictions) • Lattice QCD gives conflicting results • - Roper is consistent with 3-quark excitation (F. Lee, N*2004) • - Roper is not found as state (C. Gattringer, N*2007)

  4. Lattice calculations of P11(1440), S11(1535) C. Gattringer, N*2007 F. Lee, N*2004 Masses of both states are well reproduced in quenched LQCD with 3 valence quarks.

  5. UIM & DR Fit at low & high Q2 # data points:> 50,000 , Ee = 1.515, 1.645, 5.75 GeV

  6. Fixed-t Dispersion Relations for invariant Ball amplitudes γ*p→Nπ Dispersion relations for 6 invariant Ball amplitudes: Unsubtracted Dispersion Relations (i=1,2,4,5,6) Subtracted Dispersion Relation

  7. Dispersion Relations • Causality, analyticity constrain real and imaginary amplitudes: • Born term is nucleon pole in s- and u-channels and meson-exchange in t-channel. • Integrals over resonance region saturated by known resonances (Breit-Wigner). P33(1232) amplitudes found by solving integral equations. • Integrals over high energy region are calculated through π,ρ,ω,b1,a1 Regge poles. However these contributions were found negligible for W < 1.7 GeV • For η channel, contributions of Roper P11(1440) and S11(1535) to unphysical region s<(mη+mN)2 of dispersion integral included.

  8. Fits for ep enπ+

  9. UIM DR UIM vs DR Fits for ep →enπ+ Q2=0.4 GeV2 W = 1.53 GeV

  10. ep → enπ+ UIM Fit to Structure Functions UIM Fit Q2=0.4 GeV2

  11. Power of Interference II Im(S1+)Im(M1+) Large P33(1232) Small Im(S1-)Re(E0+) Bkg P11(1440) Resonance • Unpolarized structure function • Amplify small resonance multipole by an interfering larger resonance multipole sLT ~ Re(L*T) = Re(L)Re(T) + Im(L)Im(T) • Polarized structure function • Amplify resonance multipole by a large background amplitude sLT’ ~ Im(L*T) = Re(L)Im(T) + Im(L)Re(T)

  12. UIM Fits for ep enπ+ s+-s- Ae= s++s- Ae Polarized beam beam helicity UIM Fit

  13. Sensitivity of σLT’ to P11(1440) strength ep → eπ+n Polarized structure function are sensitive to imaginary part of P11(1440) through interference with real Born background. Shift in S1/2 Shift in A1/2

  14. Examples of diff. cross sections at Q2=2.05 GeV2 DR DR w/o P11 UIM • φ-dependence • at W=1.43 GeV • W-dependence

  15. Legendre moments forσT+ε σL Q2 = 2.05 GeV2 DR w/o P11(1440) ~cosθ ~(1 + bcos2θ) ~ const. DR UIM

  16. Multipole amplitudes forγ*p→π+n Q2 =2.05 GeV2 Q2 =0 • At Q2=1.7-4.2, resonance behavior is seen in these amplitudes more clearly than at Q2 =0 • DR and UIM give close results for real parts of multipole amplitudes Im Re_UIM Re_DR

  17. Helicity amplitudes for the γp→ P11(1440) transition CLAS Nπ, Nππ Nπ RPP Model uncertainties due to N, π, ρ(ω) → πγ form factors DRUIM

  18. Comparison with LF quark model predictionsP11(1440)≡[56,0+]r • LF CQM predictions have common features, which agree with data: • Sign of A1/2 at Q2=0 is negative • A1/2 changes • sign at small Q2 • Sign of S1/2 is • positive • 1.Weber, PR C41(1990)2783 2.Capstick..PRD51(1995)3598 • 3.Simula…PL B397 (1997)13 4.Riska..PRC69(2004)035212 • 5.Aznauryan, PRC76(2007)025212 6.Cano PL B431(1998)270

  19. Is the P11(1440) a hybrid baryon? previous data previous data g q3 G Suppression of S1/2 has its origin in the form of vertexγq→qG. It is practically independent of relativistic effects Z.P. Li, V. Burkert, Zh. Li, PRD46 (1992) 70 In a nonrelativistic approximation A1/2(Q2) and S1/2(Q2)behave like the γ*NΔ(1232) amplitudes.

  20. So what have we learned about the Roper resonance? • LQCD shows a 3-quark component. Does it exclude a meson-nucleon resonance? • Roper resonance transition formfactors not described in non-relativistic CQM. If relativity (LC) is included the description is improved. • Overall best description at low Q2 in model with large meson cloud and quark core. • Gluonic excitation, i.e. a hybrid baryon, ruled out due to strong longitudinal coupling and the lack of a zero-crossing predicted for A1/2(Q2). • Other models need to predict transition form factors as a sensitive test of internal structure. • The Q2 dependence seems qualitatively consistent with the Roper as a radial excitation of a 3 quark system, may require quark form factors.

  21. Negative Parity States in 2nd N* Region - • Hard form factor (slow fall off with Q2) • Not a quark resonance, but KΣ dynamical system? S11(1535) Change of helicity structure with increasing Q2 from Λ=3/2 dominance to Λ=1/2 dominance, predicted in nrCQMs, pQCD. D13(1520) CQM: Measure Q2 dependence of Transition F.F.

  22. The S11(1535) • This state has traditionally studied in the S11(1535)→pη channel, which is the dominant decay: S11(1535) → 55% (pη) ; pη selects isospin I=1/2 S11(1535) → 35% (Nπ); Nπ sensitive to I=1/2, 3/2 • Nearby states, especially D13(1520) have very small coupling to pη channel, making the S11(1535) a rather isolated resonance in in this channel.

  23. The S11(1535) – an isolated resonance S11→ pη (~55%) Q2=0 Resonance remains prominent up to highest Q2

  24. Response Functions and Legendre Polynomials Expansion in terms of Legendre Polynomials A0 → E0+ → A1/2(S11) Sample differential cross sections for Q2=0.8 GeV2, and selected W bins. Solid line: CLAS fit, dashed line: η-MAID.

  25. S11(1535) in pη and Nπ CLAS CLAS 2007 CLAS 2002 previous results pη

  26. Examples of Fits with UIM to CLAS data on Nπ lp= 0+multipoles Q2=0 Q2=3 GeV2 W, GeV W, GeV

  27. S11(1535) in pη and Nπ CLAS New CLAS results CLAS 2007 pπ0 nπ+ CLAS 2002 previous results pη nπ+ pπ0 pη PDG (2006): S11→πN (35-55)% → ηN (45-60)% A1/2 from pη and Nπ are consistent

  28. A new P11(1650) in γ*p→ηp ? CLAS 4 resonance fit gives reasonable description including S11(1535), S11(1650), P11(1710), D13(1520) A0 → E0+ → A1/2(S11) A1/A0 shows a sharp structure near 1.65 GeV. The observation is consistent with a rapid change in the relative phase of the E0+ and M1- multipoles because one of them is passing through resonance. No new P11 resonance needed as long as P11(1710) mass, width, BR(pη) are not better determined

  29. The D13(1520) lp= 2- multipoles

  30. Transition amplitudes γpD13(1520) CLAS A3/2 Previous pπ0 based data preliminary preliminary A1/2 Q2, GeV2 Q2, GeV2 nrCQM predictions: A1/2 dominance with increasing Q2. Nπ, pπ+π- nπ+ nπ+ pπ0 pπ0

  31. Helicity Asymmetry for γpD13 A21/2 – A23/2 Ahel = A21/2 + A23/2 Ahel D13(1520) CLAS CQMs and pQCD Ahel→ +1 at Q2→∞ Helicity structure of transition changes rapidly with Q2 from helicity 3/2 (Ahel= -1) to helicity 1/2 (Ahel= +1) dominance!

  32. What have we learned about the S11(15350 and D13(1520) resonances ? • Nπ+ and pη give consistent results for A1/2(Q2) of S11(1535) • New nπ+ data largely consistent with analysis of previous pπ0 data for A1/2 and A3/2 of D13(1520) • D13(1520) shows rapid change of helicity structure from A3/2 to A1/2 dominance. • Both states appear consistent with 3-quark model orbital excitation in [70,1-]

  33. Test prediction of helicity conservation → Expect approach to flat behavior at high Q2 Q3A1/2 S11 D13 Q5A3/2 P11 F15 F15 D13 Helicity conserving amplitude A1/2 appears to approach scaling No scaling seen for helicity non-conserving amplitude A3/2

  34. Single Quark Transition Model A orbit flip spin flip B spin-orbit C EM transitions between all members of two SU(6)xO(3) multiplets expressed as 4 reduced matrix elements A,B,C,D. Example: (D=0) Fit A,B,C to D13(1535) and S11(1520) SU(6) Clebsch-Gordon A3/2, A1/2 A,B,C,D Predicts 16 amplitudes of same supermultiplet

  35. Single Quark Transition Model Photocoupling amplitudes SQTM amplitudes (C-G coefficients and mixing angles)

  36. SQTM Predictions for [56,0+]→[70,1-] Transitions Proton

  37. SQTM Predictions for [56,0+]→[70,1-] Transitions Neutron A1/2=A3/2= 0 for D15(1675)on protons

  38. End of Part III

  39. Analysis of p+p-p single differential cross-sections. Isobar Model JM05 Full calculations gpp-D++ gpp+D0 gpp+D13(1520) gprp gpp-P++33(1600) gpp+F015(1685) direct2p production Combined fit of various 1-diff. cross-sections allowed to establish all significant mechanisms.

  40. Test of JM05 program on well known states. ep → epp+p- A3/2,GeV-1/2 (A1/22+S1/22)1/2, GeV-1/2 D13(1520) Q2 GeV2 Q2 GeV2 → JM05 works well for states with significant Npp couplings.

  41. First consistent amplitudes for A1/2(Q2), A3/2(Q2) of D33(1700) State has dominant coupling to Npp ep → epp+p- D33(1700)

More Related