# Photon-photon production of lepton, quark and meson pairs in peripheral heavy ion collisions

**ABSTRACT** We review our recent results on exclusive production of $\mu^+ \mu^-$, heavy

quark-antiquark, and meson-antimeson pairs in ultraperipheral,

ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions.

**0**Bookmarks

**·**

**98**Views

- Citations (22)
- Cited In (0)

- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]

**ABSTRACT:**A higher order QED calculation of the ultraperipheral heavy ion cross section for mu+ mu- pair production at RHIC and LHC is carried out. The so-called "Coulomb corrections" lead to an even greater percentage decrease of mu+ mu- production from perturbation theory than the corresponding decrease for e+ e- pair production. Unlike the e+ e- case, the finite charge distribution of the ions (form factor) and the necessary subtraction of impact parameters with matter overlap are significant effects in calculation an observable ultraperipheral mu+ mu- total cross section.Physical Review C 09/2009; 80(3). · 3.88 Impact Factor -
##### Chapter: Classical Electrodynamics

second 01/1975; John Wiley & Sons. - SourceAvailable from: Nicusor Timneanu[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]

**ABSTRACT:**We formulate and analyse a saturation model for the total gammagamma and cross-sections and for gamma(*)gamma(*) total cross-the real photon structure function F-2(gamma)(x, Q(2)). The model is based on a picture in which the gamma(*)gamma(*) section for arbitrary photon virtualities is driven by the interaction of colour dipoles into which the virtual photons fluctuate. The cross-section describing this interaction is assumed to satisfy the saturation property with the saturation radius taken from the Golec-Biernat and Wusthoff analysis of the gamma(*)p interaction at HERA. The model is supplemented by the QPM and non-pomeron reggeon contributions. The model gives a very good description of the data on the total cross-section, on the photon structure function F-2(gamma)(x, Q(2)) at low x and on the gamma(*)gamma(*) cross-section extracted from LEP double tagged events. The production of heavy flavours in gammagamma collisions is also studied. Predictions of the model for the very high energy range which will be probed at future linear colliders are given.European Physical Journal C 01/2002; 23(3):513-526. · 5.44 Impact Factor

Page 1

arXiv:1110.4741v1 [nucl-th] 21 Oct 2011

Photon-photon production of lepton, quark and

meson pairs in peripheral heavy ion collisions

Antoni Szczurek

Institute of Nuclear Physics PAN, Krak´ ow, Poland

Rzesz´ ow Univeristy, Rzesz´ ow, Poland

E-mail: antoni.szczurek@ifj.edu.pl

Mariola K? lusek-Gawenda

Institute of Nuclear Physics PAN, Krak´ ow Poland

Abstract.

antiquark, and meson-antimeson pairs in ultraperipheral, ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions.

We review our recent results on exclusive production of µ+µ−, heavy quark-

1. Introduction

Ultrarelativistic collisions of heavy ions provide a nice oportunity to study photon-photon

collisions [1]. One can expect an enhancement of the cross section for the reactions of this

type compared to proton-proton or e+e−collisions which is caused by a large charges of the

colliding ions. In this type of reactions virtual (almost real) photons couple to the nucleus as a

whole. Naively the enhancement of the cross section is proportional to Z2

factor. We have discussed recently that the inclusion of realistic charge distributions and realistic

nucleus charge form factor makes the cross section smaller than the naive predictions. Many

processes has been discussed in the literature. Recently we have also studied some of them.

We have discussed production of µ+µ−pairs [2] heavy-quark heavy-antiquark pairs [3] as well

as production of two mesons: ρ0ρ0pairs [4], π+π−pairs [5] as well as of D¯D meson pairs [6].

Here we shall summarize the recent works.

1Z2

2which is a huge

2. Formalism

2.1. Equivalent Photon Approximation

The equivalent photon approximation is a standard semi–classical alternative to the Feynman

rules for calculating cross sections of electromagnetic interactions [7]. This picture is illustrated

in Fig. 1 where one can see a fast moving nucleus with the charge Ze. Due to the coherent action

of all protons in the nucleus, the electromagnetic field surrounding (the dashed lines are lines of

electric force for a particles in motion) the ions is very strong. This field can be viewed as a cloud

of virtual photons. In the collision of two ions, these quasireal photons can collide with each

other and with the other nucleus. The strong electromagnetic field is a source of photons that

can induce electromagnetic reactions on the second ion. We consider very peripheral collisions

i.e. we assume that the distance between nuclei is bigger than the sum of radii of the two nuclei.

Fig. 1 explains also the quantities used in the impact parameter calculation. In the right panel

Page 2

b

b1

b2

b

Figure 1.

calculation.

A schematic picture of the collision and the quantities used in the impact parameter

we can see a view in the plane perpendicular to the direction of motion of the two ions. In order

to calculate the cross section of a process it is convenient to introduce the following kinematic

variables:

• x = ω/EA, where ω energy of the photon and the energy of the nucleus

• EA= γAmproton= γMAwhere MAis the mass of the nucleus and EAis the energy of the

nucleus

Below we consider a generic reaction AA → AAc1c2 and later consider different examples

when c1and c2are leptons, quarks or mesons. In the equivalent photon approximation the total

cross section is calculated by the convolution:

σ(AA → c1c2AA;sAA) =

?

ˆ σ(γγ → c1c2;Wγγ=√x1x2sAA)dnγγ(x1,x2,b). (1)

The luminosity function dnγγ above can be expressed in term of flux factors of photons

prescribed to each of the nucleus:

dnγγ(ω1,ω2,b) =

?

S2

abs(b)d2b1N (ω1,b1)d2b2N (ω2,b2)dω1

ω1

dω2

ω2

. (2)

The presence of the absorption factor S2

collisions, when the nuclei do not touch each other i.e. do not undergo nuclear breakup. In

the first approximation this can be taken into account by the following approximation:

abs(b) assures that we consider only peripheral

S2

abs(b) = θ(b − 2RA) = θ (|b1− b2| − 2RA) . (3)

In the present case, we concentrate on processes with final nuclei in the ground state. The

electric field force can be expressed through the charge form factor of the nucleus [2].

The total cross section for the AA → c1c2AA process can be factorized into an equivalent

photons spectra and the γγ → c1c2subprocess cross section as:

?

N (ω1,b1)N (ω2,b2)d2b1d2b2dω1

ω1

We introduce the invariant mass of the γγ system: Wγγ=√4ω1ω2. Additionally, we define

Y =1

2(yc1+ yc2) rapidity of the outgoing c1c2system. Making the following transformations:

σ(AA → c1c2AA;sAA) =ˆ σ

?

γγ → c1c2;√4ω1ω2

dω2

ω2

?

θ (|b1− b2| − 2RA)

. (4)

ω1=Wγγ

2

eY,ω2=Wγγ

2

e−Y, (5)

Page 3

dω1

ω1

dω2

ω2

=

2

WγγdWγγdY , (6)

dω1dω2→ dWγγdY,

?????

∂ (ω1,ω2)

∂ (Wγγ,Y )

?????=Wγγ

2

, (7)

formula (4) can be written in an equivalent way as:

σ(AA → c1c2AA;sAA) =

N (ω1,b1)N (ω2,b2) × d2b1d2b2Wγγ

?

ˆ σ(γγ → c1c2;Wγγ)θ (|b1− b2| − 2RA)

2

dWγγdY . (8)

Finally the cross section can be expressed as the five-fold integral:

σ (AA → c1c2AA;sAA) =

×N (ω1,b1)N (ω2,b2)2πbmdbmdbxdbyWγγ

?

ˆ σ?γγ → µ+µ−;Wγγ

?θ(|b1− b2| − 2RA)

dWγγdY ,

2

(9)

where?bx ≡ (b1x+ b2x)/2,?by ≡ (b1y+ b2y)/2 and?bm =?b1−?b2 have been introduced. The

formula above is used to calculate the total cross section for the AA → AAc1c2reaction as well

as distributions in b = bm, Wγγ= Mc1c2and Y (c1c2).

Different forms of charge form factors of nucleus were used in the literature. We compare

the equivalent photon spectra for realistic charge distribution and for the case of monopole form

factor. A compact formula how the photon flux depends on the charge form factors can be found

in [1].

N (ω,b) =Z2αem

π2

1

b2ω

?

u2J1(u)F

?

?

?

?

?bω

γ

?2+ u2

b2

1

?bω

γ

?2+ u2du

2

, (10)

where J1is the Bessel function of the first kind and q is momentum of the quasireal photon.

The calculations with the help of realistic form factor are rather laborious, so often a simpler

formula with monopole form factor is used [8].

2.2. Charge form factor of nuclei

The charge distribution in nuclei is usually obtained from elastic scattering of electrons from

nuclei [9]. The charge distribution obtained from those experiments is often parametrized with

the help of two–parameter Fermi model [10]:

ρ(r) = ρ0

?

1 + exp

?r − c

a

??−1

, (11)

where c is the radius of the nucleus, a is the so-called diffiusness parameter of the charge density.

Fig. 2 shows the charge density normalized to unity. The correct normalization is: ρ0,Au(0) =

0.1694

A

fm−3for Au and ρ0,Pb(0) =0.1604

A

fm−3for Pb.

Mathematically the charge form factor is the Fourier transform of the charge distribution [9]:

F(q) =

?4π

qρ(r)sin(qr)rdr .(12)

Fig. 3 shows the moduli of the form factor calculated from Eq.(12) as a function of momentum

transfer. Here one can see many oscillations characteristic for relatively sharp edge of the

Page 4

Figure 2. The ratio of ρ the charge distibution to ρ0, the density in the center of nucleus.

Figure 3. The moduli of the charge form factor Fem(q) of the197Au and208Pb nuclei for realistic

charge distributions. For comparison we show the monopole form factor for the same nuclei.

nucleus. We show results for the gold (solid line) and lead (dashed line) nuclei for realistic charge

distribution. For comparison we show the monopole form factor often used in the literature.

The two form factors coincide only in a very limited range of q.

The monopole form factor [8]:

F(q2) =

Λ2

Λ2+ q2. (13)

leads to a simplification of many formulae for production of pairs of particles via photon-photon

subprocess in nucleus-nucleus collisions. In our calculation Λ is adjusted to reproduce root mean

square radius Λ =

?

6

<r2>with the help of experimental data [10].

Page 5

2.3. Exclusive production of µ+µ−pairs

Elementary cross section for charged leptons can be calculated within Quantum Electrodynam-

ics. Several groups have made relevant calculations (see e.g. [11, 12, 13, 14] and references

therein).

Recently we have performed calculation of exclusive production of µ+µ−and explored

potential of RHIC and LHC in this respect. In Ref.[2] we have presented several distributions

in muon rapidity and transverse momentum for RHIC and LHC experiments, including

experimental acceptances. We have demonstrated how important is inclusion of realistic form

factor in order to obtain realistic distributions of muons for RHIC and LHC. Many previous

calculations in the literature concentrated rather on the total cross section and did not pay

attention to differential distributions. Hovever, future experiments will measure the cross section

in very limited part of the phase space. Here we wish to present only some selected examples.

Figure 4.

and WNN= 200 GeV.

dσ

dp3t(left) and the ratio (right) for the STAR conditions: y3,y4∈ (−1,1), p3t,p4t≥ 1 GeV

The distribution in the muon transverse momentum for STAR detector is shown in Fig.4.

The STAR rapidity cuts -1 < y3,y4< 1 are taken here into account. As can be seen from the

figure, the inclusion of realistic charge distribution is here extremely important. The relative

effect of damping of the cross section with respect to the results with the monopole charge form

factor (often used in the literature) is shown in the right panel. At pt= 10 GeV the damping

factor is as big as 100! Experiments at RHIC have a potential to confirm this prediction.

The ALICE collaboration can measure only forward muons with psudorapidity 3 < η < 4

and has relatively low cut on muon transverse momentum pt> 2 GeV. In Fig.5 (left panel) we

show invariant mass distribution of dimuons for monopole and realistic form factors including

the cuts of the ALICE apparatus. The bigger invariant mass, the bigger the difference between

the two results. The same is true for distributions in muon transverse momenta (see the right

panel).

2.4. Exclusive production of c¯ c and b¯b

In Fig.6,7,8,9 we show several photon-photon processes leading to the Q¯Q in the final state. In

the following we shall discuss them one by one.

Let us start with the Born direct contribution. The leading–order elementary cross section

for γγ → Q¯Q as a function of Wγγtakes a simple form which differs from that for γγ → l+l−

by color factors and fractional charges of quarks.

Page 6

Figure 5.

dσ

dWγγ(left) and

dσ

dp3t=

dσ

dp4t(right) for ALICE conditions: y3,y4= (3,4), p3t,p4t≥ 2 GeV.

γ

γ

¯Q

Q

γ

γ

¯Q

Q

Figure 6. Representative diagrams for the Born amplitudes.

++

++

++

Figure 7. Representative diagrams for the leading–order QCD corrections.

In the current calculation we take the following heavy quark masses: mc = 1.5 GeV,

mb= 4.75 GeV. It is obvious that the final Q¯Q state cannot be observed experimentally due

to the quark confinement and rather heavy mesons have to be observed instead. Presence of

additional few light mesons is rather natural. This forces one to include also more complicated

final states.

In contrast to QED production of lepton pairs in photon-photon collisions, in the case of

Q¯Q production one needs to include also higher-order QCD processes which are known to be

Page 7

γ

γ

Q

¯Q

q

¯ q

=

γ

γ

¯ q

Q

¯Q

q

Figure 8. Representative diagrams for Q¯Qq¯ q production. The oval in the figure means a complicated

interaction which is described here in the saturation model as explained in the main text.

γ

γ

¯Q

Q

g

X1

γ

γ

Q

¯Q

g

X2

Figure 9. Representative diagrams for the single-resolved mechanism. The shaded oval means either

t- or u- diagrams shown in Fig. 6.

rather significant. Here we include leading–order corrections only for the direct contribution.

In αs-order there occur one-gluon bremsstrahlung diagrams (γγ → Q¯Qg) and interferences of

the Born diagram with self-energy diagrams (in γγ → Q¯Q) and vertex-correction diagrams (in

γγ → Q¯Q). The relevant diagrams are shown in Fig.7. We have followed the approach presented

in Ref. [15]. The QCD corrections can be written as:

σQCD

γγ→Q¯ Q(g)(Wγγ) = Nce4

Q

2πα2

W2

em

γγ

CFαs

πf(1).(14)

The function f(1)is calculated using a code provided by the authors of Ref. [15]. In the present

analysis the scale of αsis fixed at µ2= 4m2

Q.

We include also the subprocess γγ → Q¯Qq¯ q, where q (¯ q) are u, d, s, quarks (antiquarks). The

cross section for this mechanism can be easily calculated in the color dipole framework [16, 17].

In the dipole–dipole approach [17] the total cross section for the γγ → Q¯Q production can be

expressed as:

σ4q

γγ→Q¯Q(Wγγ)

=

?

?

f2?=Q

? ???ΦQ¯Q(ρ1,z1)

? ???Φf1¯ f1(ρ1,z1)

???

2???Φf2¯f2(ρ2,z2)

???

???

???

2σdd(ρ1,ρ2,xQf)d2ρ1dz1d2ρ2dz2

+

f1?=Q

2???ΦQ¯Q(ρ2,z2)

2σdd(ρ1,ρ2,xfQ)d2ρ1dz1d2ρ2dz2, (15)

where ΦQ¯Q(ρ,z) are the quark – antiquark wave functions of the photon in the mixed

representation and σddis the dipole–dipole cross section. Eq.(15) is correct at sufficiently high

Page 8

energy Wγγ ≫ 2mQ. At lower energies, the proximity of the kinematical threshold must be

taken into account. In Ref. [16] a phenomenological saturation–model inspired parametrization

for the azimuthal angle averaged dipole–dipole cross section has been proposed:

σa,b

dd= σa,b

0

?

1 − exp

?

−

r2

eff

4R2

0(xab)

??

. (16)

Here, the saturation radius is defined as:

R0(xab) =

1

Q0

?xab

x0

?−λ/2

(17)

and the parameter xabwhich controls the energy dependence is given by:

xab=4m2

a+ 4m2

W2

γγ

b

. (18)

The effective radius is parametrized as r2

of the dipole-dipole cross section were also discussed in the literature. The cross section for the

γγ → Q¯Qq¯ q process here is much bigger than the one corresponding to the tree-level Feynman

diagram as it effectively resums higher-order QCD contributions.

As discussed in Ref. [17] the Q¯Qq¯ q component have very small overlap with the single-

resolved component because of quite different final state, so adding them together does not lead

to double counting. The cross section for the single-resolved contribution can be written as:

eff= (ρ1ρ2)2/(ρ1+ρ2) [16] . Some other parametrizations

σ1−res(s) =

?

dx1

?

g1

?

x1,µ2?

ˆ σgγ(ˆ s = x1s)

?

+

?

dx2

?

g2

?

x2,µ2?

ˆ σγg(ˆ s = x2s)

?

, (19)

where g1and g2are gluon distributions in photon 1 or photon 2 and ˆ σqγand ˆ σγgare elementary

cross sections. In our calculation we take the gluon distribution from Ref. [18].

Elementary cross sections have been presented and discussed in Ref.[3]. Here we show only

nuclear cross sections. In Fig. 10 we compare the contributions of the different mechanisms

as a function of the photon–photon subsystem energy. For the Born case it is identical as a

distribution in quark-antiquark invariant mass. In the other cases the photon–photon subsystem

energy is clearly different than the Q¯Q invariant mass. These distributions reflect the energy

dependence of the elementary cross sections. Please note a sizable contribution of the leading–

order corrections close to the threshold and at large energies for the c¯ c case. Since in this case

Wγγ> MQ¯Q, it becomes clear that the Q¯Qq¯ q contributions must have much steeper dependence

on the Q¯Q invariant mass than the direct one which means that large Q¯Q invariant masses

are produced mostly in the direct process. In contrast, small invariant masses (close to the

threshold) are populated dominantly by the four–quark contribution. Therefore, measuring the

invariant mass distribution one can disentangle some of the different mechanisms. As far as this

is clear for the c¯ c it is less transparent and more complicated for the b¯b production. In the last

case the experimental decomposition may be in practice not possible.

In Table 1 we show partial contribution of different subprocesses discussed above.

2.5. Exclusive production of π+π−pairs

In this subsection we discuss production of only “large” invariant mass π+π−pairs. Brodsky

and Lepage developed a formalism [19] how to calculate relevant cross section. Typical diagrams

Page 9

Figure 10. The nuclear cross section as a function of photon–photon subsystem energy Wγγin EPA.

The solid line denotes the results corresponding to the Born amplitude (c¯ c -left panel and b¯b -right

panel). The leading–order QCD corrections are shown by the dash-dotted line. For comparison we show

the differential distributions in the case when an additional pair of light quarks is produced in the final

state (dashed lines) and for the single-resolved components (dotted line).

Table 1. Partial contributions of different mechanisms at√sNN= 5.5 TeV.

σtot

BornQCD-corr.

cc 2.47 mb 42.5 %14.6 %

bb 10.83 µb 18.9 %

4-q Sin.-res.

15.8 %

8.9 %

27.1 %

64.5 %7.7 %

π

π

π

π

π

π

π

π

π

π

Figure 11.

pQCD.

Typical Feynman diagrams describing the γγ → (q¯ q)(q¯ q) → ππ amplitude in the LO

of the Brodsky-Lepage formalism are shown in Fig. 11. The invariant amplitude for the initial

helicities of two photons can be written as the following convolution:

M(λ1,λ2) =

?1

0

dx

?1

0

dy φπ

?

x,µ2

x

?

Tλ1λ2

H

?

x,y,µ2?

φπ

?

y,µ2

y

?

, (20)

where µx= min(x,1 − x)?s(1 − z2), µy= min(y,1 − y)?s(1 − z2); z = cosθ [19]. We take

the helicity dependent hard scattering amplitudes from Ref. [20]. These scattering amplitudes

are different for π+π−and π0π0. The distribution amplitudes are subjected to the ERBL pQCD

evolution [21, 22]. The scale dependent quark distribution amplitude of the pion can be expanded

in term of the Gegenbauer polynomials:

φπ

?

x,µ2?

=

fπ

2√36x(1 − x)

∞′

?

n=0

C3/2

n

(2x − 1)an

?

µ2?

. (21)

Page 10

where fπis the pion decay constant.

Different distribution amplitudes have been used in the past. Recently Wu and Huang [23]

proposed a new distribution amplitude (based on a light-cone wave function):

√3Amqβ

2√2π3/2fπ

φπ

?x,µ2

0

?=

?

8β2x(1 − x)

?

x(1 − x)

?

1 + B × C3/2

2

(2x − 1)

?

Erf

m2

q+ µ2

0

− Erf

?

m2

q

8β2x(1 − x)

.

(22)

The pion distribution amplitude at the initial scale is controlled by the parameter B. They have found

that the BABAR data for pion transition form factor at low and high transferred four-momentum squared

regions can be described by setting B ≈ 0.6. This pion distribution amplitude is rather similar to the well

know Chernyak-Zhitnitsky [24] distribution amplitude (φπ CZ= 30x(1 − x)(2x − 1)2). In the following

we shall use B = 0.6 and mq= 0.3 GeV. Then A = 16.62 GeV−1and β = 0.745 GeV.

The total (angle integrated) cross section for the process can be expressed in terms of the amplitude

of the process discussed above as:

σγγ→ππ=

?

2π

4 · 64π2W2

p

q

?

λ1,λ2

|M(λ1,λ2)|2dz , (23)

where the factor 4 is due to averaging over initial photon helicities.

The hand-bag model was proposed as an alternative for the leading term Brodsky-Lepage pQCD

approach[25]. It is based on the philosophy that the present energies are not sufficient for the dominance of

the leading pQCD terms. As in the case of BL pQCD the hand-bag approach applies at large Mandelstam

variables s ∼ −t ∼ −u i.e. at large momentum transfers. Diehl, Kroll and Vogt presented a sketchy

derivation [25] obtaining that the angular dependence of the amplitude is ∝ 1/sin2θ. In this approach

the ratio of the cross section for the π0π0process to that for the π+π−process does not depend on θ

and is

2. The nonperturbative object Rππ(s) in the hand-bag amplitude, describing transition from a

quark pair to a meson pair, cannot be calulated from first principles. In Ref. [25] the form factor was

parametrized in terms of the valence and non-valence form factors as:

1

Rππ(s) =

5

9sau

?s0

s

?nu+1

9sas

?s0

s

?ns. (24)

The au, nu, asand nsvalues found from the fit in Ref. [25] slightly depend on energy. For simplicity we

have averaged these values and used: au= 1.375 GeV2, nu= 0.4175, as= 0.5025 GeV2and ns= 1.195.

In Ref.[5] we have discussed in detail elementary cross sections as a function of photon-photon energy

and as a function of cos(θ). Here we will present only nuclear cross sections calculated within EPA

discussed in the theoretical section.

In Fig. 12 we show distribution in the two-pion invariant mass which by the energy conservation is

also the photon-photon subsystem energy. For this figure we have taken experimental limitations usually

used for the ππ production in e+e−collisions. In the same figure we show our results for the γγ collisions

extracted from the e+e−collisions together with the corresponding nuclear cross sections for π+π−(left

panel) and π0π0(right panel) production. We show the results for the standard BL pQCD approach

with and without extra form factor (see [26]).

Comparing the elementary and nuclear cross sections we see a large enhancement of the order of 104

which is, however, somewhat less than Z2

2one could expect from a naive counting.

1Z2

2.6. Exclusive production of ρ0ρ0pairs

At low energies one observes a huge enhancement of the cross section for the elementary process γγ → ρ0ρ0

(see left panel of Fig.13). In the right panel we show predictions of a simple Regge-VDM model with

parameters adjusted to the world hadronic data. More details about our model can be found in our

original paper [4].

In Fig.14 we show distribution in ρ0ρ0invariant mass (left panel) and the ratio of the cross section

for realistic and monopole form factors.

Page 11

(GeV)

π π

= M

γ γ

W

02468 10

(nb/GeV)

γ γ

/ dW

σ

d

-3

10

-2

10

-1

10

1

10

2

10

3

10

4

10

5

10

6

10

7

10

8

10

9

10

10

10

|<0.6

θ

|cos

-π

+

π

→

γ γ

Pb

-π

+

π

Pb

→

Pb Pb

= 3.5 TeV

NN

s

without form factor

with form factor

(GeV)

π π

= M

γ γ

W

02468 10

(nb/GeV)

γ γ

/ dW

σ

d

-3

10

-2

10

-1

10

1

10

2

10

3

10

4

10

5

10

6

10

7

10

8

10

9

10

10

10

|<0.8

θ

|cos

0

π

0

π

→

γ γ

Pb

0

π

0

π

Pb

→

Pb Pb

= 3.5 TeV

NN

s

without form factor

with form factor

Figure 12. The nuclear (upper lines) and elementary (lower lines) cross section as a function of photon–

photon subsystem energy Wγγ in the b-space EPA within the BL pQCD approach for the elementary

cross section with Wu-Huang distribution amplitude. The angular ranges in the figure caption correspond

to experimental cuts.

Figure 13.

shown in the left panel and our predictions for the high energy in the right panel.

Elementary cross section for γγ → ρ0ρ0reaction. The fit to the experimental data is

2.7. Some comments and outlook

We have presented some examples of processes that could be soon studied at RHIC or LHC. In all cases

we have obtained measurable cross sections. We have pointed out that the inclusion of realistic charge

form factor is necessary to obtain realistic particle distributions.

Measurements of the processes discussed here are not easy as one has to assure exclusivity of the

process, i.e., it must be checked that there are no other particles than that measured in central detectors.

In all cases fissibilty studies, including Monte Carlo simulations, are required.

In the close future one may expect results for two-pion and single vector mesons production from LHC

experiments. Exclusive production of one or two pairs of charged leptons should be feasible too.

Acknowledgments Some of the results presented here were obtained in collaboration with Wolfgang

Sch¨ afer, Valerij Serbo and Magno Machado.

Page 12

Figure 14. Distribution in the ρ0ρ0invariant mass

References

[1] Budnev V M et al. 1975 Phys. Rep. 15 4

Bertulani C A, Baur G 1988 Phys. Rep. 163 299

Baur G, Hencken K, Trautmann D, Sadovsky S and Kharlov Y 2002 Phys. Rep. 364 259

Bertulani C A, Klein S and Nystrand J 2005 J Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.55 271

Baltz A et al. 2008, Phys. Rep. 458 1

[2] K? lusek-Gawenda M and Szczurek A 2010 Phys. Rev. C 82 014904

[3] K? lusek-Gawenda M, Szczurek A, Machado M and Serbo V 2011 Phys. Rev. C 83 024903

[4] K? lusek M, Sch¨ afer W and Szczurek A 2009 Phys. Lett. B 674 92

[5] K? lusek-Gawenda M and Szczurek A 2011, Phys. Lett. B 700 322

[6] ? Luszczak M and Szczurek A 2009 Phys. Lett. B 700 116

[7] Jackson J D 1975, Classical Electrodynamics, 2nd ed. (Wiley, New York), p. 722

[8] Hencken K, Trautmann D and Baur G 1994 Phys. Rev. A 49 1584

[9] Barrett R C and Jackson D F 1977 Nuclear Sizes and Structure, (Clarendon Press, Oxford)

[10] de Vries H, de Jager C W and de Vries C 1987 Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 36 495

[11] Baur G and Bertulani C A 1987 Phys. Rev. C 35 836

[12] Hencken K, Trautmann D and Baur G 1999 Phys. Rev. C 59 841

[13] Ivanov D Yu, Schiller A and Serbo V G 1999 Phys. Lett. B 454 155

Henecken K, Kuraev E A and Serbo V G 2007 Phys. Rev. C 75 034903

Jentschura U D, Hencken K and Serbo V G 2008 Eur. Phys. J. C 58 281

Jentschura U D and Serbo V G 2009 Eur. Phys. J. C 64 309

[14] Baltz A 2008 Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 062302

Baltz A 2009 Phys. Rev. C 80 034901

[15] Kniehl B A, Kotikov A V, Merebashvili Z V and Veretin O L 2009 Phys. Rev. D 79 114032

[16] Timneanu N, Kwieci´ nski J and Motyka L 2002 Eur. Phys. J. C 23 513

[17] Szczurek A 2002 Eur. Phys. J. C 26 183

[18] Gluck M, Reya E and Vogt A 1992 Phys. Rev. D 46 1973

[19] Brodsky S J and Lepage G P 1981 Phys. Rev. D 24 1808

[20] Ji C R and Amiri F 1990 Phys. Rev. D 42 3764

[21] Brodsky S J and Lepage G P 1979 Phys. Lett. B 87 359

[22] Efremov A V and Radyushkin A V 1980 Phys. Lett. B 94 245

[23] Wu X G and Huang T 2010 Phys. Rev. D 82 034024

[24] Chernyak V L and Zhitnitsky A R 1982 Nucl. Phys. B 201 492

[25] Diehl M, Kroll P and Vogt C 2002 Phys. Lett. B 532 99

Diehl M and Kroll P 2010 Phys. Lett. B 683 165

[26] Szczurek A and Speth J 2003 Eur. Phys. J. A 18 445

#### View other sources

#### Hide other sources

- Available from Mariola Klusek-Gawenda · Jun 3, 2014
- Available from ArXiv