arxiv: v3 [nucl-th] 6 Sep 2010

Transcription

1 Associated strangeness roduction in the K + K and K + π 0 Σ 0 reactions Ju-Jun Xie 1,2, and Colin Wilkin 3, 1 Instituto de Fisica Coruscular (IFIC), Centro Mixto CSIC-Universidad de Valencia, Institutos de Investigacion de Paterna, Atd , E Valencia, Sain 2 Deartment of Physics, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan , China 3 Physics and Astronomy Deartment, UCL, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom (Dated: Setember 7, 2010) arxiv: v3 [nucl-th] 6 Se 2010 The total and differential cross sections for associated strangeness roduction in the K + K and K + π 0 Σ 0 reactions have been studied in a unified aroach using an effective Lagrangian model. Itis assumed thatboththek andπ 0 Σ 0 finalstates originate from thedecayof the Λ(1405) resonance which was formed in the roduction chain (N (1535) K + Λ(1405)). The available exerimental data are well reroduced, esecially the ratio of the two total cross sections, which is much less sensitive to the articular model of the entrance channel. The significant couling of the N (1535) resonance to Λ(1405)K is further evidence for large s s comonents in the quark wave function of the N (1535) resonance. PACS numbers: n.; Gk.; Eg. I. INTRODUCTION The N (1535) isobar has roved to be a controversial resonance for many years. In the simle three-quark constituent model, the odd arity N (1535)(J = 1/2 ) should be the lowest satially excited nucleon state, with one quark in a wave. However, the even arity N (1440)hasinfactamuchlowermass,desiterequiring two units of excitation energy. This is the long-standing mass inversion roblem of the nucleon sectrum. The N (1535) resonance coules strongly to the ηn channel [1] but a large N (1535)KΛ couling has also been deduced [2 4] through the analysis of BES data on J/ψ η, ΛK + decays [5] and COSY data on the ΛK + reaction near threshold [6]. Analyses [7, 8] of recent SAPHIR [9] and CLAS [10] γ K + Λ data also indicate a large couling of the N (1535) to KΛ. In a chiral unitary couled channel model it is found that the N (1535) resonance is dynamically generated, with its mass, width, and branching ratios in fair agreement with exeriment [2, 11 14]. This aroach shows that the coulings of the N (1535) resonance to the KΣ, ηn and KΛ channels could be large comared to that for πn. Data on the γ η [15] and η reactions [16] suggest also a couling of the isobar to η N. In addition, there is some evidence for a N (1535)Nφ couling from the π nφ and φ [17, 18] as well as the n dφ [19] reactions. The mass inversion roblem could be understood if there were a significant s s comonents in the N (1535) wave function [20, 21] and this would also rovide a natural exlanation of its large coulings to the strangeness KΛ, KΣ Nη and Nφ channels. It would furthermore Electronic address: xiejujun@ific.uv.es Electronic address: cw@he.ucl.ac.uk lead to an imrovement in the descrition of the helicity amlitudes in N (1535) hotoroduction [22]. We wish to argue in this aer that a hidden strangeness comonent in the N (1535) might lay a much wider role in associated strangeness roduction in medium energy nuclear reactions. The Λ(1405)(J = 1/2 ) can be considered as the strangeness S = 1 counterart of the N (1535) and its structure is ossibly even more controversial. In quark model calculations, it is described as a wave q 3 baryon [23] but it can also be exlained as a KN molecule [24] or q 4 q entaquark state [25]. On the other hand, within unitary chiral theory [2, 11, 26], two overlaing I = 0 states are dynamically generated and in this aroach the shae of any observed Λ(1405) sectrum might deend uon the roduction rocess. In a recent study of the K + Λ(1405) reaction [27] the resonance was clearly identified through its π 0 Σ 0 decay and no obvious mass shift was found. However, this result is inconclusive in the sense that the data could also be well described in the two-resonance scenario [28]. For simlicity we shall here work within the single Λ(1405) framework with arameters as reorted in the PDG review [1]. In arallel with the Λ(1405) measurement, Maeda et al. also extracted differential and total cross sections for kaon air roduction in the K + K reaction [29]. These results show clear evidence for the excitation and decay of the φ meson sitting on a smooth K + K background, whose shae resembles hase sace. It has been suggested [30] that the Λ(1405) could be imortant for the non-φ kaon air roduction through the K + (Λ(1405) K ) reaction. This would, of course, only be relevant for the isosin I = 0 K contribution but this is likely to dominate the low mass region because of the resence of the Λ(1405). It is therefore the urose of the resent aer to analyze simultaneously the available data on K + Σ 0 π 0

2 2 and K + K roduction at a beam energy of 2.83 GeV [27, 29] within a unified henomenological model, wherethen (1535)isobaractsasadoorwaystate for both roduction rocesses. The foundation of the model is the assumtion that there are large s s comonents in the quark wave function of the N (1535) isobar and that these induce a significant N (1535) : Λ(1405)K couling. This in turn allows the ossibility that the roduction of the Λ(1405) in roton-roton and π collisions could be dominated by the excitation and decay of the N (1535) resonance below the Λ(1405)K threshold. Within this icture, we calculate the K + Λ(1405) K + (K /π 0 Σ 0 ) and π Λ(1405)K 0 reactions using an effective Lagrangian aroach. We show that the ion-induced data are indeed comatible with the large N (1535) : Λ(1405)K couling resulting from the s s comonents in the N (1535). The resulting theoretical estimates of the K + K and K + π 0 Σ 0 differential and total cross sections describe well the available COSY exerimental data [27, 29]. In articular, the ratio of these two cross sections, where many of the theoretical uncertainties cancel, is reroduced within the total theoretical and exerimental uncertainties. Section II resents the formalism and ingredients required for the calculation, with the numerical results and discussions being given in Sec. III. A short summary and a resentation of our conclusions then follows in Sec. IV be included. K (π 0 ) (Σ 0 ) K + Λ N π 0 (a) (b) (c) (d) FIG. 1: Feynman diagrams for the K + Λ(1405) K + (K /π 0 Σ 0 ) reaction. π π N q K0 Λ K 0 FIG. 2: Feynman diagram for π Λ(1405)K 0 reaction. Here π,, K 0, Λ and q are the four-momenta of π, roton, K 0, Λ(1405), and intermediate N (1535) resonance, resectively. Λ II. FORMALISM AND INGREDIENTS We study the K + Λ(1405) K + (K /π 0 Σ 0 ) and π Λ(1405)K 0 reactions in an effective Lagrangian aroach on the assumtion that the roduction of the KΛ(1405) air is dominantly through the excitation and decay of the sub-threshold N (1535) resonance. It is generally assumed that the roduction of η mesons in nucleon-nucleon collisions near threshold asses mainly through the N (1535), which has a very strong couling to Nη. However, there is far from unanimity in the modelling of these rocesses within a meson-exchange icture, with different grous considering π, ρ, η, and ω exchanges to be imortant [18, 31]. Fortunately, the estimation of the K + Λ(1405) cross section in our model is only sensitive to the roduction rate of the N (1535) and single ion exchange is sufficient for this urose. By neglecting η and ρ exchanges, we can resent a unified icture of ion- and roton-induced roduction rocesses, though our results are more general than this would suggest. The basic Feynman diagrams for the t-channel exchanges in K + Λ(1405) K + (K /π 0 Σ 0 ) reaction and the s channel diagram for π Λ(1405)K 0 are deicted in Figs. 1 and 2, resectively. For the K + π 0 Σ 0 reaction, only diagramsin Figs. 1(a) and 1(b) need to be considered, while for the K + K reaction, the exchange terms 1(c) and 1(d) have also to We emloy the commonly used interaction Lagrangian for the πnn vertex, L πnn = ig πnn Nγ5 τ πn, (1) with an off-shell form factor taken from the Bonn otential model [32] F NN π (kπ 2 ) = Λ2 π m2 π Λ 2, (2) π k2 π where k π, m π and Λ π are the four-momentum, mass and cut-off arameter for the exchanged ion. The couling constant and the cutoff arameter are taken to be g 2 πnn /4π = 14.4 and Λ π = 1.3 GeV/c 2 [32, 33]. To evaluate the invariant amlitudes corresonding to the diagrams of Figs. 1 and 2, we also need to know the interaction Lagrangians involving the N (1535) and Λ(1405) resonances. In Ref. [34], a Lorentz-covariant orbital-sin(l-s)schemeforn NM coulingswasstudied in detail. Within this aroach, the N (1535)Nπ, N (1535)Λ(1405)K, Λ(1405) KN and Λ(1405)πΣ effective coulings become, L N Nπ = ig N NπN τ πn +h.c., L N Λ K = g N Λ K N γ 5 γ µ µ KΛ +h.c., m K L Λ KN = ig Λ KN N KΛ +h.c., L Λ πσ = ig Λ πσ Λ π Σ+h.c.. (3)

3 3 To minimize the number of free arameters, a similar diole form factor to that of Eq. (2) will be used for the N (1535)Nπ vertex, with the same value of the cut-off arameter. The N (1535)Nπ, and Λ(1405)πΣ couling constants are determined from the artial decay widths of these two resonances [1]. With the effective interaction Lagrangians of Eqs. (3), the couling constants are related to the artial decay widths by where with Γ N (1535) Nπ = 3g2 N Nπ (m N +E N )N cm, 4πM N N = λ1/2 (MN 2,m2 N,m2 π), 2M N cm E N = ( cm N )2 +m 2 N, (4) and corresondingly for the Λ(1405) πσ decay in terms of the g Λ πσ couling constant. Here λ is the triangle function, λ(x,y,z) = x 2 +y 2 +z 2 2xy 2xz 2yz. (5) Although the mass differences do not allow one to obtain directly similar results for the N (1535)Λ(1405)K vertex, the requisite information can be extracted from π Λ(1405)K 0 data, rovided that this reaction is dominated by the s-channel N (1535) ole of Fig 2. The corresonding invariant amlitude A becomes: A = 2gN Nπg N Λ K m K F N (q 2 )ū( Σ,s Σ ) γ 5/ K 0G N (q)u(,s ), (6) where s Σ and s are the baryon sin rojections. The form factor for the N (1535) resonance, F N (q 2 ), is taken in the form advocated in Refs. [7, 35]: F N (q 2 ) = Λ 4 N ΛN 4 +(q2 MN 2 (7) )2, with Λ N = 2.5 GeV/c 2. The N (1535) roagator is written in a Breit-Wigner form [36]: G N (q) = i(/q +M N ) q 2 M 2 N +im N Γ N (q2 ), (8) where Γ N (q 2 ) is the energy-deendent total width. Keeing only the dominant πn and ηn decay channels [1], this can be decomosed as Γ N (q 2 ) = a πn ρ πn (q 2 )+b ηn ρ ηn (q 2 ), (9) where a πn = 0.12 GeV/c 2, b ηn = 0.32 GeV/c 2, and the two-body hase sace factors, ρ π(η)n (q 2 ), are ρ(q 2 ) = 2 cm (q 2 )Θ(q 2 q 2 thr) / q2, (10) and q thr is the threshold value for the decay channel. A similar reresentation is adoted for the Λ(1405) roagator and form factor, with the same value of the cut-off arameter Λ Λ = 2.5 GeV/c 2. Because the Λ(1405) resonance lies slightly below the KN threshold, the only nominally allowed decay channel is πσ. Nevertheless, ever since the ioneering work of Dalitz and Tuan [24] it has been known that there is also a strong couling to KN. The ensemble of low energy data on K and related channels has been described in terms of a searable otential model [37]. In contrast to the unitary chiral aroach [28], the searable model roduces only a single Λ(1405) ole and from this we can investigate its effects above the KN threshold. These can be arametrized in terms of an energy deendent artial width Γ Λ(1405) (q 2 ) = a πσ ρ πσ (q 2 )+b KN ρ KN (q 2 ), (11) where a πσ = 0.22 GeV/c 2, b KN = 0.49 GeV/c 2 and the two-body hase sace factors are given in Eq. (10). By using g 2 Λ KN = (m Σ +E Σ (q 2 )) (m N +E N (q 2 )) g2 Λ πσ, (12) the width equation (11) leads to a Λ(1405) KN couling constant g 2 Λ KN /4π = 0.27 at the KN threshold. We now evaluate the π Λ(1405)K 0 total cross section as a function of the center-of-mass energy. The value of the N (1535)Λ(1405)K couling constant gn 2 Λ K /4π = 0.28 leads to the redictions that are comared with exerimental data[38] in Fig. 3. Although the agreement is reasonable, it must be stressed that the redictions arenot verysensitive to the mass ofthe N, rovided it lies well below the KΛ(1405) threshold. As can be judged from the figure, a very similar shae would be obtainedifoneusedforexamletheseconds 11 resonance N (1650). However, it has been shown [18] that a large s s comonent in the N (1650) resonance is not consistent with its smaller couling to Nη than Nπ. It should also be noticed that any ossible contributions from t- and u-channel exchanges have also been neglected. The value of this couling constant is given along with others in Table. I. The full invariant amlitude for the K + K reaction is comosed of four arts, corresonding to the diagrams shown in Fig. 1; M = η i M i. (13) i=a,b,c,d Totakeaccountoftheantisymmetryoftherotonsinthe initial and final states, factors η a = η d = 1 and η b = η c =

4 4 K + meson. The ion roagator is 10 2 G π (k π ) = i kπ 2 m 2 (15) π ( b) N * (1535) N * (1650) S 1/2 (GeV) FIG. 3: Total cross section for the π Λ(1405)K 0 reaction as a function of the c.m. energy s. The solid curve reresents the fit of the s-channel N (1535) ole of Fig. 2 to the available exerimental data [38]. The dashed curve is the corresonding fit if the N (1650) resonance were used instead. TABLE I: Values of the couling constants required for the estimation of the K + K and K + π 0 Σ 0 cross sections. These have been estimated from the branching ratios quoted [1], though it should be noted that these are for all final charged states. As described in the text, the Λ KN couling was obtained from the energy deendence of the Λ(1405) width given by Eq. (11), and the N Λ K couling was derivedfrom measurements of theπ Λ(1405)K 0 total cross section. Vertex Branching ratio g 2 /4π N Nπ Λ πσ Λ KN 0.27 N Λ K are introduced. It is imortant to note that only M a and M b should be considered for the K + π 0 Σ 0 reaction. Each amlitude can be derived straightforwardly with the effective coulings given. We give as an examle the form of the M a amlitude: M a = g πnng N Nπg N Λ Kg Λ KN Fπ NN (kπ 2 m ) K F N N π (kπ)f 2 N (q1)f 2 Λ (q2)g 2 π (k π )ū( 4,s 4 ) G Λ(1405) (q 2 )γ 5/ 5 G N (1535)(q 1 )u( 1,s 1 ) ū( 3,s 3 )γ 5 u( 2,s 2 ), (14) where s i (i = 1,2,3,4) and i (i = 1,2,3,4) reresent the sin rojections and four-momenta of the two initial and two final rotons, resectively. The q 1 and q 2 are the four-momenta ofintermediate N (1535)and Λ(1405) resonances, while 5 is the four-momentum of the final The final-state-interaction(fsi) between the two emerging rotons in the 1 S 0 wave in the K + K case is taken into account using the Jost function formalism [39], with J(q) 1 = k +iβ k iα, (16) where k is the internal momentum of subsystem. The arameters α = 20.5 MeV/c and β = MeV/c [40] give a slightly stronger FSI in the near-threshold region than that used in the exerimental aer [29]. The normalization is chosen such that the differential cross section is dσ( K + K ) = m2 F 1 M 2md3 3 4 E s 3 i,s f m d 3 4 E 4 d 3 5 2E 5 d 3 6 2E δ4 ( ), (17) with the flux factor F = (2π) 8 ( 1 2 ) 2 m 4. (18) The factor 1 2 before the δ-function in Eq. (17) results from having two final identical rotons and must be omitted for the K + π 0 Σ 0 final state. III. NUMERICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Theredictionsforthevariationofthe K + K total cross section with excess energy ε, calculated using a Monte Carlo multiarticle hase-sace integration rogram, are shown in Fig. 4. Although the general shae of the exerimental data is described, nevertheless the results very close to threshold are underestimated. This may be due to the neglect of a K + K final state interaction [41], which might be associated with the influence of the a 0 and f 0 scalar resonances [29]. The redicted K invariant mass sectrum for the K + {K } reaction at T = 2.83 GeV (ε = 108 MeV) is comared in Fig. 5 to the exerimental data from the ANKE grou [29]. The theoretical model reroduceswelltheshaeofthedata,beingmuchmoreeaked to lower invariant masses than the four-body hase-sace distribution, which is also shown. As already indicated in Fig. 4, the redicted 100 nb coincides with the exerimental value of (98±8±15) nb, where the first error is statistical and the second systematic [29]. The corresonding results for the π 0 Σ 0 invariant mass distribution for the K + π 0 Σ 0 reaction at the same beam energy, but excess energy ε = 212 MeV, are

5 5 100 shown in Fig. 6 together with the ANKE data [27]. Although the statistics are low, the shae of the sectrum is described correctly, with a rather asymmetric Λ(1405) eak that is strongly influenced by the oening of the KN threshold, that is by the energy deendence of the Λ(1405) width arametrized by Eq. (11). On the other hand, the overall normalization of the rediction is too high, giving a cross section of 4.0 µb comared to an exerimental value of(1.5±0.3±0.6) µb[27]. The redicted normalization could, of course, be reduced by considering the initial state interaction but that would then lower also the value for the K + K channel. (nb) (MeV) FIG. 4: The non-φ contribution to the K + K total cross section versus excess energy ε. The results of the resent calculation are comared with exerimental data from Refs. [29] (closed circles), [42] (oen square), [43] (closed squares), and [44] (oen circle). FIG. 6: Differential cross section for the K + π 0 Σ 0 reaction at an excess energy of ε = 212 MeV. The redictions of the N (1535) model (solid line) have been scaled down by a factor of about 1.5/4 before being comared to the ANKE data [27]. The fairly shaeless four-body hase-sace distribution (dashed line) has also been normalized to the total number of exerimental events. Manyeffectscancelout inthe estimation ofthe ratioof the K + K to K + πσ total cross sections. These include initial state distortions and most of the arameters connected with the N (1535). Combining the two exerimental results one finds that, at a roton beam energy of 2.83 GeV, FIG. 5: Differential cross section for the K + K reaction at the excess energy ε = 108 MeV as a function of the K invariant mass M(K ). The ANKE data of Ref. [29] are comared to the redictions of the N (1535) model (solid line), whereas the dashed line reresents a normalized fourbody hase-sace distribution. R Kπ = σ( K+ K ) σ( K + π 0 Σ 0 ) = (65±24) 10 3, (19) where only non-φ events have been considered. This is to be comared with a value of R Kπ obtained within the framework of the resent model. The theoretical uncertainties are hard to quantify because they reside to a largeextent in the modelling of the lowenergy K /π 0 Σ 0 system[37], which isbaseduon alimited exerimental data set. In addition there are ossibly small contributions from I = 1 s-wave K airs or, for the higher masses, also some -wave contributions. In view of the large exerimental and theoretical uncertainties, the good agreement for the R Kπ ratio is very satisfactory. IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The total and differential cross sections for associated strangeness roduction in the K + {K } and K + {π 0 Σ 0 } reactions have been studied in a unified aroach using an effective Lagrangian model. The

6 6 basic assumtions are that both the K and π 0 Σ 0 systems come from the decay of the Λ(1405) resonance. This state itself results from the excitation of the N (1535) isobar, for which there is strong evidence for the imortance of hidden strangeness comonents. Although only ion exchange has been ket in the N (1535) reaction, our redictions are sensitive to the N (1535) roduction rate and ion exchange rovides a reasonable descrition of this. Within the model, the energy deendence of the K + K total cross section is well reroduced, as are the characteristic K and π 0 Σ 0 invariant mass distributions. Of articular interest is the ratio R Kπ of the K + K and K + π 0 Σ 0 total cross sections becausein theestimationofr Kπ manyunknownsdroout. Aart from initial state distortion, which has been comletely neglected in our work, the details of the N (1535) doorway state are largely irrelevant rovided that this state lies well below the K + Λ(1405) threshold. Thus the very satisfactory rediction for R Kπ would remain the same if one assumed that the rocesses were driven for examle by the N (1650) isobar. On the other hand, it is the absolute value of either cross section that deends uon the N (1535) hyothesis and it is the reasonable descrition here that gives further weight to the idea of large s s comonents in this isobar. The link between K and π 0 Σ 0 roduction could be established through the use of much low energy data, which led to the henomenological searable otential descritionofthecouledk π 0 Σ 0 systems[37]. Although this articular model gives rise to a single Λ(1405) ole it is merely a arametrization of measured scattering data and we cannot rule out the ossibility that similar results would be obtained if one used a chiral unitary descrition which requires two Λ(1405) oles [28]. The roduction of K K resonances, such as the a 0 /f 0 scalars [1], can clearly not contribute to the K + π 0 Σ 0 reaction. Consequently, even if the model resented here is only qualitatively correct it would suggest that non-φ K + K roduction in K + K is drivendominantly throughthe excitation ofk + -hyeron airs rather than non-strange mesonic resonances. Further exerimental data are needed and some should be available soon on the K + π 0 Σ 0 reaction at the slightly higher energy of 3.5 GeV from the HADES collaboration [45]. It would, however, be highly desirable to have data on kaon air roduction at a similar energy in order to rovide an indeendent check on the value of R Kπ and hence on the aroach resented here. Acknowledgments WewishtothankXuCao,A.Gal, M.Hartmann,Feng- Kun Guo, J. Nieves, N. Shevchenko, and Bing-Song Zou for useful discussions, and the CAS Theoretical Physics Center for Science Facilities for suort and hositality during the initiation of this work. This research was artially suorted by Ministerio de Educación Estancias de movilidad de rofesores e investigadores extranjeros en centros esañoles, Contract No. SB [1] C. Amsler et al., Phys. Lett. B 667, 1 (2008). [2] C. Garcia-Recio, M. F. M. Lutz and J. Nieves, Phys. Lett. B 582, 49 (2004). [3] B. C. Liu and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, (2006); B. C. Liu and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, (2007); B. C. Liu and B. S. Zou, Commun. Theor. Phys. 46, 501 (2006). [4] L. S. Geng, E. Oset, B. S. Zou and M. Döring, Phys. Rev. C 79, (2009). [5] J. Z. Bai et al., Phys. Lett. B 510, 75 (2001); H. X. Yang et al., Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 20, 1985 (2005). [6] P. Kowina et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 22, 293 (2004). [7] G. PennerandU. Mosel, Phys.Rev.C66, (2002); ibid. C 66, (2002); V. Shklyar, H. Lenske and U. Mosel, Phys. Rev. C 72, (2005). [8] B. Julia-Diaz, B. Saghai, T.-S. H. Lee and F. Tabakin, Phys. Rev. C 73, (2006). [9] M. Q. Tran et al., Phys. Lett. B 445, 20 (1998); K. H. Glander et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 19, 251 (2004). [10] R. Nasseriour et al., Phys. Rev. C 77, (2008). [11] N. Kaiser, T. Waas and W. Weise, Nucl. Phys. A 612, 297 (1997). [12] T. Inoue, E. Oset and M. J. Vicente Vacas, Phys. Rev. C 65, (2002). [13] J. Nieves and E. Ruiz Arriola, Phys. Rev. D 64, (2001). [14] M. Döring and K. Nakayama, Eur. Phys. J. A 43, 83 (2010). [15] M. Dugger et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, (2006); Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, (2006). [16] Xu Cao and X. G. Lee, Phys. Rev. C 78, (2008). [17] M. Döring, E. Oset and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. C 78, (2008). [18] J. J. Xie, B. S. Zou and H. C. Chiang, Phys. Rev. C 77, (2008). [19] Xu Cao, J. J. Xie, B. S. Zou and H. S. Xu, Phys. Rev. C 80, (2009). [20] B. S. Zou, Nucl. Phys. A 835, 199 (2010). [21] A. Zhang et al., High Ener. Phys. Nucl. Phys. 29, 250 (2005). [22] C. S. An and B. S. Zou, Eur. Phys. J. A 39, 195 (2009). [23] N. Isgur and G. Karl, Phys. Rev. D 18, 4187 (1978). [24] R. H. Dalitz and S. F. Tuan, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 10, 307 (1960). [25] T. Inoue, Nucl. Phys. A 790, 530 (2007). [26] E. Oset and A. Ramos, Nucl. Phys. A 635, 99 (1998); E. Oset, A. Ramos and C. Bennhold, Phys. Lett. B 527, 99 (2002); J. A. Oller and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Lett. B 500, 263 (2001); D. Jido, J. A. Oller, E. Oset and U.- G. Meißner, Nucl. Phys. A 725, 181 (2003); C. Garcia- Recio, J. Nieves, E.RuizArriolaandM. J.VicenteVacas, Phys. Rev. D 67, (2003); T. Hyodo, S. I. Nam,

7 7 D. Jido and A. Hosaka, Phys. Rev. C 68, (2003). [27] I. Zychor et al., Phys. Lett. B 660, 167 (2008). [28] L. S. Geng and E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. A 34, 405 (2007). [29] Y. Maeda et al., Phys. Rev. C 77, (2008). [30] C. Wilkin, Acta Phys. Polon. Proc. Su. 2, 89 (2009). [31] J.-F. Germond and C. Wilkin, Nucl. Phys. A 518, 308 (1990); J. M. Laget, F. Wellers and J. F. Lecolley, Phys. Lett. B 257, 258 (1991); T. Vetter, A. Engel, T. Biró and U. Mosel, Phys. Lett. B 263, 153 (1991); E. Gedalin, A. Moalem and L. Razdolskaja, Nucl. Phys. A 650, 471 (1999); M. Batinić, A. Švarc and T.-S. H. Lee, Physica Scrita 56, 321 (1997); V. Bernard, N. Kaiser and U.- G. Meißner, Eur. Phys. J. A 4, 259 (1999); M. T. Peña, H. Garcilazo and D. O. Riska, Nucl. Phys. A 683, 322 (2001); G. Fäldt and C.Wilkin, Physica Scrita 64, 427 (2001); K. Nakayama, Y. Oh and H. Haberzettl, arxiv: (2008). [32] R. Machleidt, K. Holinde and C. Elster, Phys. Re. 149, 1 (1987). [33] K. Tsushima, S. W. Huang and A. Faessler, Phys. Lett. B 337, 245 (1994); K. Tsushima, A. Sibirtsev and A. W. Thomas, Phys. Lett. B 39, 29 (1997). [34] B. S. Zou and F. Hussain, Phys. Rev. C 67, (2003). [35] T. Feuster and U. Mosel, Phys. Rev. C 58, 457 (1998); ibid. 59, 460 (1999). [36] W. H. Liang et al., J. Phys. G 28, 333 (2002). [37] N. V. Shevchenko, A. Gal and J. Mareš, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, (2007); N. V. Shevchenko, A. Gal, J. Mareš and J. Révai, Phys. Rev. C 76, (2007). [38] A. Baldini, V. Flamino, W. G. Moorhead and D. R. O. Morrison, Landolt-Börnstein, Numerical Data and Functional Relationshis in Science an Technology, vol. 12, ed. H. Schoer, Sringer-Verlag(1988). [39] J. Gillesie, Final-State Interactions, (Holden-Day, San Francisco, 1964). [40] A. Sibirtsev, J. Haidenbauer and U.-G. Meißner, Eur. Phys. J. A 27, 263 (2006). [41] A. Dzyuba et al., Phys. Lett. B 668, 315 (2008). [42] F. Balestra et al., Phys. Rev. C 63, (2001). [43] P. Winter et al., Phys. Lett. B 635, 23 (2006). [44] C. Quentmeier et al., Phys. Lett. B 515, 276 (2001). [45] L. FabbiettiandE.Ele, Nucl.Phys.A835, 333(2010).