Today the Editor of International Journal of Modern Physics E, the World Scientific journal on nuclear physics, communicated to me that my paper has been accepted for publication. Such kind of communications represent a moment of great accomplishment for us doing research. The reason is that a publication is a recognition of our work as worth to appear in an archival journal. This paper is very important as I show, given the gluon propagator, how a Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model can be straightforwardly derived with all the constants fixed by QCD. This is a substantial starting point to compute all properties of particles in hadronic physics. Indeed, in our recent posts about quarkonia we have seen how masses for ground state resonances can be obtained with a very small error. These results represent a sound proof that our propagator is the right one if lattice and numerical computations would not be enough.
Finally, Nora Brambilla communicated to me that I am enlisted intto the mail list of Quarkonia Working Group. This group is composed by some of the most important physicists working in the area of hadronic physics and Nora and her husband Antonio Vairo are two of them. I hope to give some significant contributions in the near future to this group.
As an amateur, I have to say that I think that this sort of method of avoiding infinities is the right way the field should be headed. In a sense, it’s not along the path elementary particles has been headed, where things are broken down into smaller and smaller things, but I think this sort of thing will eventually give hints on how better to break things down into smaller things. Model first, theorize later.
I’m not adequate to give much feedback on the subject, but noticed an obvious typo: “We emphasize that in order to do this comparison we only need to fix the parameter μ that gives the gluon mass,” was clearly supposed to be “glueball mass”.
And this a beautifully written paper. You must have spent time in the US or Britain to have English mastered so well. A minor instance is “this are not gluons” needs to be “these are not gluons” or “this is not a gluon”. I’d explain why but I was taught the language at my mother’s lap and consequently do not understand it…
Thanks fro your comment. “This” and “These” is one of my recurring errors that I cannot rid of but if you read my blog you can verify easily that English is not my mother language and, indeed, the referee of my paper pointed out several points where corrections were needed. This is a problem that referees have often pointed me out (after more than 50 publications I should have learned!). I think that, as an Italian, a bright example of good English can be read at Tommaso Dorigo blog http://dorigo.wordpress.com/. He has a rich vocabulary and builds sentences much better than me. Anyhow, as for my experiences at conferences and talking with US and British people I am somewhat satisfied with my understanding of spoken language and my capability of sustaining a conversation.
By the way, I am now reading a book of Robin Cook in original language and this is an exercise I do often. It should improve my English but as for now I am not much convinced of this.
[…] and gluon propagator As I have pointed out in a preceding post, I have got a paper of mine accepted for publication (see here) where I derive a Nambu-Jona-Lasinio […]
[…] So, this is a key moment for Yang-Mills theory. It implies a great understanding of the behavior of the theory in a regime not accessible before. Knowing the gluon propagator means that a Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model describes correctly the phenomenology at low energies. This we proved quite recently (see this post). […]