- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Lattice results on the connected neutron charge radius

Alfred Tang* and Walter Wilcox

Randy Lewis

  • Department of Physics, Baylor University, Waco, Texas 76798-7316, USA

  • Department of Physics, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada S4S 0A2

  • *Present address: Max Planck Institut fur Kernphysik, D-69029 Heidelberg, Germany.
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 68, 094503 – Published 6 November, 2003

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.68.094503

Abstract

We describe a calculation using quenched lattice QCD of the connected part of the neutron electric form factor for momentum transfers in the range 0.3GeV2≲−q2≲1.0GeV2. We extract the implied charge radius using a Galster parametrization and consider various ways of extrapolating the neutron charge radius value to the chiral limit. We find that the measured charge radii may be reconciled to experiment by standard phenomenology and lowest or next to lowest order contributions from chiral perturbation theory.

View figure in article

References (33)

  1. J. Bermouth et al., Phys. Lett. B 564, 199 (2003); ibid.G. Kubon et al., 524, 26 (2001); H. Zhu et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 081801 (2001); J. Becker et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 6, 329 (1999); J. Golak et al., Phys. Rev. C 63, 034006 (2001); C. Herberg et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 5, 131 (1999); M. Ostrick et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 276 (1999); ibid.I. Passchier et al., 82, 4988 (1999); R. Schiavilla and I. Sick, Phys. Rev. C 64, 041002 (2001); M.K. Jones et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 1398 (2000); ibid.O. Gayou et al., 88, 092301 (2002).
  2. M. Göckeler et al., “Nucleon electromagnetic form factors on the lattice and in chiral effective field theory,” hep-lat/0303019; J. van der Heide et al., Phys. Lett. B 566, 131 (2003); A new decomposition is given in LHPC and SESAM Collaborations, D.B. Renner et al., Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 119, 395 (2003).
  3. See the Introduction in the first reference of [1].
  4. H. Gao, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 12, 1 (2003).
  5. W. Wilcox, T. Draper, and K.F. Liu, Phys. Rev. D 46, 1109 (1992).
  6. T. Draper, R.M. Woloshyn, and K.F. Liu, Phys. Lett. B 234, 121 (1990); D.B. Leinweber, R.M. Woloshyn, and T. Draper, Phys. Rev. D 43, 1659 (1991); ibid.D.B. Leinweber, T. Draper, and R.M. Woloshyn, 46, 3067 (1992).
  7. S.J. Dong, K.F. Liu, and A.G. Williams, Phys. Rev. D 58, 074504 (1998).
  8. K.F. Liu et al., Phys. Rev. D 49, 4755 (1994); S. Capitani et al., Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 73, 294 (1999); K.F. Liu, S.J. Dong, T. Draper, and W. Wilcox, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 2172 (1995); M. Fukugita et al., Phys. Rev. D 51, 5319 (1995); ibid.S.J. Dong, J.F. Lagaë, and K.F. Liu, 54, 5496 (1996).
  9. W.C. Liu, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 20, 149 (1991).
  10. QCDPAX Collaboration, Y. Iwasaki et al., Phys. Rev. D 53, 6443 (1996).
  11. M. Göckeler et al., Phys. Rev. D 57, 5562 (1998).
  12. C.R. Allton, V. Gimenez, L. Giusti, and F. Rapuano, Nucl. Phys. B489, 427 (1997).
  13. R. Lewis, W. Wilcox, and R.M. Woloshyn, Phys. Rev. D 67, 013003 (2003).
  14. S. Galster et al., Nucl. Phys. B32, 221 (1971).
  15. Particle Data Group, K. Hagiwara et al., Phys. Rev. D 66, 010001 (2002).
  16. Our procedure is similar to the reordered SU(3) chiral series technique suggested in Mojzis and Kambor, Phys. Lett. B 476, 344 (2000) in which certain bare parameters are replaced with physical values. For “bare” here read “chirally extrapolated” and for “physical” read “measured closest to the chiral limit.”
  17. W. Wilcox, Phys. Rev. D 57, 6731 (1998).
  18. R. Flores-Mendieta, E. Jenkins, and A.V. Manohar, Phys. Rev. D 58, 094028 (1998).
  19. M.N. Butler, M.J. Savage, and R.P. Springer, Nucl. Phys. B399, 69 (1993).
  20. The results in Table IV of Ref. [13], which represent a combined fit of disconnected scalar and electromagnetic contributions to the nucleon form factors, resulted in a slightly smaller value of C∼0.9–1.0 at κ=0.152.
  21. P.R. Bevington and D.K. Robinson, Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences, 3rd ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 2003).
  22. W. Detmold et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 172001 (2001).
  23. S.J. Puglia, M.J. Ramsey-Musolf, and S.L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 63, 034014 (2001).
  24. J.N. Labrenz and S.R. Sharpe, Phys. Rev. D 54, 4595 (1996).
  25. M.J. Savage, Nucl. Phys. A700, 359 (2002).
  26. This same cancellation occurs in mass shift diagrams of Fig. 6(d) of Ref. [24].
  27. M.N. Butler, M.J. Savage, and R.P. Springer, Phys. Lett. B 304, 353 (1993).
  28. Although the one-loop decuplet diagrams are conventionally included in the discussions of leading chiral logs, one can actually see from Eqs. (A4), (A6), and (A11) that the mX→0 limit produces forms proportional to ln(Δ2/μ2). That is, when mX vanishes the heavy baryon denominator structure v⋅l+Δ, where v is the velocity and l is loop momentum, still has a fixed infrared scale Δ and does not produce a chiral log in mX.
  29. J.A. McGovern and M.C. Birse, Phys. Lett. B 446, 300 (1999).
  30. S.J. Dong et al., “Chiral logs in quenched QCD,” hep-lat/0304005; S. Aoki et al., Phys. Rev. D 67, 034503 (2003).
  31. W. Wilcox, in DPF ’96: The Minneapolis Meeting, edited by K. Heller, J.K. Nelson, and D. Reader (World Scientific, Singapore, 1996), Vol. 1, p. 632.
  32. B. Kubis, T.R. Hemmert, and U-G. Meissner, Phys. Lett. B 456, 240 (1999).
  33. D. Arndt and B.C. Tiburzi, this issue, Phys. Rev. D 68, 094501 (2003).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 68, 094503– Published 6 November, 2003
  • Received 7 July 2003

© 2003 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation