The Nucleon-Nucleon Interaction in a Chiral Effective Field Theory
The Nucleon-Nucleon Interaction in a Chiral Effective Field Theory
The Nucleon-Nucleon Interaction in a Chiral Effective Field Theory
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
3.9. Three-nucleon potential 115<br />
lead<strong>in</strong>g-order 3N force with<strong>in</strong> time-ordered perturbation theory. It is weIl known that the static<br />
2 3 4<br />
5 6<br />
Figure 3.24: Lead<strong>in</strong>g contributions to the three-nucleon potential: reducible twopion<br />
exchange diagrams and reducible one-pion exchange graphs with the NN contact<br />
<strong>in</strong>teraction. For notations see figs. 3.6, 3.23.<br />
TPE 3N force cancels aga<strong>in</strong>st the recoil corrections of the nucleons to the static OPE 2N potential,<br />
when the latter is iterated <strong>in</strong> the Lippmann-Schw<strong>in</strong>ger equation [191], [46]. <strong>The</strong> same sort<br />
of cancelation happens for the lead<strong>in</strong>g TPE and OPE 3N forces related to diagrams 1-8 and 10<br />
<strong>in</strong> fig. 3.23, as has been found by van KoIck [77]. S<strong>in</strong>ce the energy dependence of the NLO 2N<br />
potential is entirely given by recoil corrections of the nucleons to the static OPE, one can describe<br />
systems of three or more nucleons us<strong>in</strong>g the energy-<strong>in</strong>dependent part of the 2N potential and<br />
without explicit three- and many-nucleon forces (at next-to-Iead<strong>in</strong>g order <strong>in</strong> the chiral expansion<br />
for the potential). However, such type of cancelations does not help to remove the problems<br />
<strong>in</strong> the two-nucleon sector due to the explicit energy-dependence as noted before (i.e. that the<br />
wavefunctions are only orthonormal to the order one is work<strong>in</strong>g).<br />
Let us now take a closer look at the 3N force obta<strong>in</strong>ed with the projection formalism. As already<br />
stated above, for the TPE graph 9 <strong>in</strong> fig. 3.23 one obta<strong>in</strong>s the same result us<strong>in</strong>g both schemes.<br />
Apart from the irreducible TPE diagrams 1-8 and OPE diagram 10 <strong>in</strong> fig. 3.23, one also has to<br />
take <strong>in</strong>to account "reducible" graphs shown <strong>in</strong> fig. 3.24. <strong>The</strong> diagrams 1-4 <strong>in</strong> this figure refer to the<br />
last two terms <strong>in</strong> the third l<strong>in</strong>e of eq. (3.254), whereas the graphs 5 and 6 <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g the N N contact<br />
<strong>in</strong>teractions arise from the terms <strong>in</strong> the fourth l<strong>in</strong>e of this equation. Obviously, the cancelation of<br />
the lead<strong>in</strong>g 3N force with the iterated energy dependent part of the 2N potential, as observed <strong>in</strong><br />
the context of old-fashioned perturbation theory, is now not possible because the potential <strong>in</strong> the<br />
projection formalism is energy <strong>in</strong>dependent. Nevertheless, the lead<strong>in</strong>g-order 3N force completely<br />
vanishes <strong>in</strong> the method of unitary transformation, although the mechanism of the cancelation<br />
is different from the above case. In the projection formalism, the 3N force vanishes because of