Particle Physics pp 215-276 | Cite as

# Duality in Strong Interaction Physics

## Abstract

The purpose of this series of lectures is not to introduce a theory, but rather an approach to strong interaction physics. This approach appears at present as fruitful and exciting and many papers exploring the consequences of duality have recently been published or are being circulated in preprint form. Nevertheless, I should mention to begin with that the whole matter is still in a controversial form. There is not yet agreement on how far duality can be used, since no precise definition for it is yet available. As a consequence, results presented here as definitive success are still bitterly challenged there. I will therefore not even try to start by a tentative definition which will emerge only as we proceed. In any case, after Horn’s series of lectures [1] on the use of finite energy sum rules, a very good idea of what it should be has already been gathered.

## Keywords

Partial Wave Regge Trajectory Partial Wave Amplitude Channel Pole Channel Resonance## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References and Footnotes

- 1.D. Horn, Lecture Notes, Schladming Winter School 1969.Google Scholar
- 2.V. Barger, Communication at the Vienna Conference (1968).Google Scholar
- C. Schmid, CERN preprint TH.960, to be published in Nuovo Cimento.Google Scholar
- A. H. Rosenfeld, Tables, UCRL-8030 (1969).Google Scholar
- 3.Continuation to complex values of the angular momentum has to be made separately for even and odd J values since (−1)
^{J}does not fulfil the conditions of the Carlson theorem. The absence of an absorptive part in either the s or u channel, say, will therefore lead to two coincident t channel Regge trajectories with opposite signatures.Google Scholar - 4.We will not consider here in detail the implication of the splitting of the A
_{2}[5]. We will consider the A_{2}as the nonet partner of the f. If the two A_{2}peaks have to be associated with the same set of quantum numbers, we would then expect a similar splitting for all the nonet members.Google Scholar - 5.W. Kienzle, Philadelphia Conference on Meson Spectroscopy (1968).Google Scholar
- H. Benz et al., Phys. Letters 28B, 233 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 6.Writing a once subtracted dispersion relation for α(t), one sees that the observed widths of meson resonances cannot support the large observed slope.Google Scholar
- P. D. B. Collins, R. C. Johnson and E. Squires, Phys. Letters 26B, 223 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 7.S. Mandelstam, Phys. Rev. 166, 1539 (1968).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- K. Dietz, Lecture Notes, Schladming Winterschool 1969.Google Scholar
- 8.B. E. Y. Svensson, CERN Report 67-24 (1967); L. van Hove, CERN Lecture Notes (1968).Google Scholar
- M. Jacob, Herceg Novi Lecture Notes (1968).Google Scholar
- 9.A sum of resonance contributions may be a good approximation to an inelastic (or charge exchange)amplitude. It is difficult to test in any definite way resonance saturation since there is much ambiguity at parametrizing resonances away from the poles, especially when they are highly inelastic.Google Scholar
- 10.G. F. Chew, Comments Nucl. Particle Phys. 1, 121 (1967).Google Scholar
- R. Dolen, D. Horn and C. Schmid, Phys. Rev. 166, 1768 (1968).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- C. Schmid, Phys. Rev. Letters 20, 628 (1968).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- G. F. Chew and A. Pignotti, Phys. Rev. Letters 20, 1078 (1968).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.The imaginary part (say) of a Regge amplitude cannot reproduce the wiggles associated with the direct channel resonances. Nevertheless, we expect at best the Regge amplitude to represent what we would obtain smearing out all resonance peaks. It should correspond to a good average even for several moments, which defines a semilocal approximation.Google Scholar
- 12.Continuation to positive t values located in the double spectral function region is, of course, not possible from a phase shift or a multipole expansion. Nevertheless, it is done on the ground that the zero width (real a) approximation is not too far from the actual case to still yield interesting results.Google Scholar
- 13.C. Schmid, Phys. Rev. Letters 20, 689 (1968).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- P. D. B. Collins, R. C. Johnson and E. J. Squires, Phys. Letters 27B, 23 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
- C. Schmid, CERN Preprint TH.958, to be published in Nuovo Cimento.Google Scholar
- see also, Ref.[8], M. Jacob, Herceg Novi Lecture Notes (1968).Google Scholar
- 14.C. Lovelace, Proceedings of the Heidelberg Conference (1967).Google Scholar
- 15.
- 16.A second sheet pole, with dominant effect, is the simplest way to interpret the presence of an Argand loop. If further imposes the factorization property attached to a resonance. It is, however, not the only way of producing an Argand loop.Google Scholar
- 17.C. Lovelace, Contribution to the Vienna Conference (1968).Google Scholar
- 18.H. Harari, Phys. Rev. Letters 20, 1395 (1968); Contribution to the Vienna Conference (1968)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- P. G. O. Freund, Phys. Rev. Letters 20, 235 (1968).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.D. Morrison, Phys. Letters 22, 528 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.C. B. Chiu and J. Finkelstein, Phys. Letters 27B, 510 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 21.R. H. Dalitz, Les Houches Lecture Notes (1965).Google Scholar
- 22.The decoupling of the Σ and Y
_{1}*(1910) from the ̄KN channel imposes a particular F/D ratio α = F/F+D=½.Google Scholar - 23.Standard absorption collections using the Baker-Blankenbecler formalism, say [24], will leave the amplitude real if the initial Regge amplitude is real. To the contrary, the phases of the spin flip and non-spin flip amplitude become different when originally complex.Google Scholar
- 24.M. Baker and Blankenbecler, Phys. Rev. 128, 415 (1962).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.L. van Hove, Phys. Letters 24B, 183 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
- L. Durand III, Phys. Rev. 161, 1610 (1967).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.
- 27.V. A. Alessandrini, D. Amati and E. J. Squires, Phys. Letters 27B, 463 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 28.V. Barger and M. Olsson, Phys. Rev. 146, 980 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.H. Harari, Phys. Rev. Letters 22, 562 (1969).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.J. Rosner, Tel Aviv University preprint (1968).Google Scholar
- G. P. Canning, University of Oxford preprint (1969).Google Scholar
- 31.With standard nonet mixing the φ(ω) and f′ (f) have only strange (non-strange) quarks. This leads to the “ideal” nonet mass formula where two states (I=1 and I=0) are degenerate in mass and where the squared [21]. We postulate the absence of coupling between two states which have, one, only non-strange quarks and, the other, only strange quarks. The φ and f′ couplings to non-strange mesons or baryons are indeed much weaker than the ω and f couplings.Google Scholar
- 32.G. Veneziano, Nuovo Cimento 57A, 190 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 33.S. Mandelstam, Phys. Rev. Letters 21, 1724 (1968).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.M. Gell-Mann, Geneva Conference (1962).Google Scholar
- 35.K. Igi, Phys. Letters 28B, 330 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 36.E. Malamund and P. E. Schlein, Phys. Rev. Letters 18, 1056 (1967).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- C. Lovelace, R. M. Heinz and A. Donnachie, Phys. Letters 22B, 322 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 37.C. Lovelace, Phys. Letters 28B, 265 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 38.S. L. Adler, Phys. Rev. 137, B1022 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 39.S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Letters 17, 616 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.K. Kawarabayashi, S. Kitakado and H. Yabuki, Phys. Letters 28B, 432 (1969).ADSGoogle Scholar
- C. Lovelace, unpublished.Google Scholar
- 41.G. P. Canning, Oxford preprint (1968). J. Rosner, Tel Aviv preprint (1968); H. Olson, London preprint (1968); J. Baacke et al., CERN preprint TH.983 (1968).Google Scholar
- 42.F. Wagner, CERN preprint TH.978 (1969).Google Scholar
- 43.A. Martin, Nuovo Cimento 47A, 265 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 44.A. Montanet et al., CERN preprint (1969).Google Scholar
- 45.M. Ademollo, G. Veneziano, and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Letters 22, 83 (1969).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 46.The identity of the slopes is proved in Ref. [45]. Relation (30) can be also written for an external particle with the same spin S
_{A}on the assumed parallel daughter. This implies that the ratio of the two slopes is an integer. Assuming that the Adler condition is satisfied the same way (through vanishing of each term) when A and X replace one another, the inverse ratio has also to be an integer and as a result.Google Scholar - 47.K. Igi and R. Storrow, to be published in Nuovo Cimento; C. Lovelace, to be published.Google Scholar
- 48.The analysis sketched here was done in collaboration with J. Baacke, S. Pokorsky and C. Schmid.Google Scholar
- 49.We disregard here the possibility that an isospin zero trajectory, at the pion daughter level, might “conspire” with the π A
_{1}, trajectory in order to eliminate exotic resonances from the crossed channel. We choose to relate together only leading trajectories in either channels.Google Scholar - 50.P. G. O. Freund and E. Schonberg, Phys. Letters 28B, 600 (1969).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 51.V. de Alfaro, S. Fubini, G. Furlan and C. Rossetti, Phys. Letters 21, 576 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- F. Gilman and H. Harari, Phys. Rev. 165, 1803 (1968).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 52.K. Bardakci and H. Ruegg, Phys. Letters 28B, 342 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 53.Chan Hong-Mo, Phys. Letters 28B, 425 (1969).Google Scholar
- Chan Hong-Mo and Tsou Sheung Tsun, Phys. Letters 28B, 485 (1969).Google Scholar
- J. F. L. Hopkinson and E. Plahte, Phys. Letters 28B, 489 (1969).ADSGoogle Scholar
- M. A. Virasoro, Phys. Rev. Letters 22, 37 (1969).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- J. G. Goebel and B. Sakita, Phys. Rev. Letters 22, 257 (1969).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar