Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
added a few more pointers:
J. R. Pelaez, From controversy to precision on the sigma meson: a review on the status of the non-ordinary $f_0(500)$ resonance, Physics Reports 658 (2016) 1 (arXiv:1510.00653)
S. S. Afonin, T. D. Solomko, The sigma meson from QCD sum rules for large-$N_c$ Regge spectra, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 678 (2016) (arXiv:1608.08131)
S. S. Afonin, T. D. Solomko, The linear radial spectrum of scalar mesons within the QCD sum rules in the planar limit, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 678 (2016) (arXiv:1608.08131)
Discussion in holographic QCD:
On sigma-mesons and omega-mesons mediating baryon interaction, discussed in holographic QCD via D3-D7 brane intersections:
Why does $\sigma$-meson not feature on the meson page?
The sigma is a curious thing. Not evidently part of the quark model (!) The review
has the word “confusing” appear 22 times.
But at the very least I can add it to the top left of the table of Lorentz/isospin representations. Will do.
Ha, 22! About 20 ’controversy/-ial’s too.
Even with the $\sigma$ being elusive, it seems be be uncontroversial that “it” provides the main contribution of the nuclear force between hadrons.
It’s quite remarkable how many and how basic open questions are being swept under the rug by pretending that “QCD explains nuclear physics”.
1 to 6 of 6