
We improve our description of pionpion scattering data by imposing
additional requirements to our previous fits, in the form of oncesubtracted
Roylike equations, while extending our analysis up to 1100 MeV. We provide
simple and ready to use parametrizations of the amplitude. In addition, we
present a detailed description and derivation of these oncesubtracted
dispersion relations that, in the 450 to 1100 MeV region, provide an additional
constraint which is much stronger than our previous requirements of Forward
Dispersion Relations and standard Roy equations. The ensuing constrained
amplitudes describe the existing data with rather small uncertainties in the
whole region from threshold up to 1100 MeV, while satisfying very stringent
dispersive constraints. For the S0 wave, this requires an improved matching of
the low and high energy parametrizations. Also for this wave we have considered
the latest low energy Kl4 decay results, including their isospin violation
correction, and we have removed some controversial data points. These changes
on the data translate into better determinations of threshold and subthreshold
parameters which remove almost all disagreement with previous Chiral
Perturbation Theory and Roy equation calculations below 800 MeV. Finally, our
results favor the dip structure of the S0 inelasticity around the controversial
1000 MeV region.

We report our progress on the data analysis of $\pi\pi$ scattering data in
terms of Forward Dispersion Relations (FDR), as well as Roy equations (RE) and
their oncesubtracted counterpart, GKPY equations. The first part of the
analysis consists of independent fits to the different $\pi\pi$ channels. The
GKPY equations provide a more stringent consistency check for the
parametrizations of the S0wave data in the region from 400 to 1100 MeV, In the
second part we present our preliminary analysis where the fits are constrained
to satisfy all dispersion relations within errors, including the new GKPY Eqs.,
thus providing a very precise and model independent description of data using
just analyticity, causality and crossing.

This talk is dedicated to the memory of Paco Yndurain, the original speaker
in the conference. After a short account of his scientific career, we briefly
review our ongoing collaboration to determine precisely the $\pi\pi$ scattering
amplitude including the most recent data by means of Forward Dispersion
Relations and Roy Equations. A remarkable improvement in precision over the
intermediate energy region is obtained by using oncesubtracted Roy Equations
in addition to the standard twicesubtracted ones.

We present a set of once subtracted dispersion relations which implement
crossing symmetry conditions for the $\pi\pi$ scattering amplitudes below 1
GeV. We compare and discuss the results obtained for the once and twice
subtracted dispersion relations, known as Roy's equations, for three $\pi\pi$
partial JI waves, S0, P and S2. We also show that once subtracted dispersion
relations provide a stringent test of crossing and analyticity for $\pi\pi$
partial wave amplitudes, remarkably precise in the 400 to 1.1 GeV region, where
the resulting uncertainties are significantly smaller than those coming from
standard Roy's equations, given the same input.

We complete and improve the fits to experimental $\pi\pi$ scattering
amplitudes, both at low and high energies, that we performed in the previous
papers of this series. We then verify that the corresponding amplitudes satisfy
analyticity requirements, in the form of partial wave analyticity at low
energies, forward dispersion relations (FDR) at all energies, and Roy equations
below$\bar{K}K$ threshold; the first by construction, the last two, inside
experimental errors. Then we repeat the fits including as constraints FDR and
Roy equations. The ensuing central values of the various scattering amplitudes
verify very accurately FDR and, especially, Roy equations, and change very
little from what we found by just fitting data, with the exception of the D2
wave phase shift, for which one parameter moves by $1.5 \sigma$. These improved
parametrizations therefore provide a reliable representation of pionpion
amplitudes with which one can test various physical relations. We also present
a list of low energy parameters and other observables. In particular, we find
$a_0^{(0)}=0.223\pm0.009 M^{1}_\pi$, $a_0^{(2)}=0.0444\pm0.0045 M^{1}_\pi$
and $\delta_0^{(0)}(m^2_K)\delta_0^{(2)}(m^2_K)=50.9\pm1.2^{\rm o}$.

\noindent 1. Generalities\hfil\break 2. Lie groups and Lie
algebras\hfil\break
3. The unitary groups\hfil\break
4. Representations of the SU(n) groups (and of their algebras)\hfil\break
5. The tensor method for unitary groups, and\hb the permutation
group\hfil\break
6. Relativistic invariance. The Lorentz group\hfil\break
7. General representation of relativistic states

The experimental results obtained in the last few years on kaon decays
(K$\to2\pi$ and, above all, Ke4 decays) allow a reliable, model independent
determination of low energy $\pi\pi$ scattering in the S0 wave. Using them and,
eventually, other sets of data, it is possible to give a precise
parametrization of the S0 wave as well as to find the scattering length and
effective range parameter. One can also perform an extrapolation to the pole of
the "$\sigma$ resonance" [$f_0(600)$]. We obtain the results
$$a_0^{(0)}=0.233\pm0.013 M^{1}_\pi,\quad b_0^{(0)}=0.285\pm0.012 M^{3}_\pi$$
and, for the $\sigma$ pole, $$M_\sigma=484\pm17 \mev,\quad\gammav_\sigma/2=
255\pm10 {\rm MeV}.$$

We consider the sum rule proposed by one of us (SLA), obtained by taking the
expectation value of an axial vector commutator in a state with one pion. The
sum rule relates the pion decay constant to integrals of pionpion cross
sections, with one pion off the mass shell. We remark that recent data on
pionpion scattering allow a precise evaluation of the sum rule. We also
discuss the related AdlerWeisberger sum rule (obtained by taking the
expectation value of the same commutator in a state with one nucleon),
especially in connection with the problem of extrapolation of the pion momentum
off its mass shell. We find, with current data, that both the pionpion and
pionnucleon sum rules are satisfied to better than six percent, and we give
detailed estimates of the experimental and extrapolation errors in the closure
discrepancies.

We consider the Olsson sum rule, i.e., the forward dispersion relation for
pionpion scattering with exchange of isospin unity at threshold. We show that,
if using the S0, S2 and P wave expressions of Colangelo, Gasser and Leutwyler,
then either the sum rule is not satisfied or, if adjusting the residue of the
rho exchange Regge amplitude to have the sum rule satisfied (as recently
proposed by Caprini, Colangelo and Leutwyler) then the subsequent high energy
amplitude is in disagreement with experimental pipi cross sections.

We review results of an analysis of pipi interactions in S, P and D waves for
twopion effective mass from threshold to about 1.4 GeV. In particular we show
a recent improvement of this analysis above the K antiK threshold using more
data for phase shifts and including the S0 wave inelasticity from pipi > K
antiK. In addition, we have improved the fit to the f2(1270) resonance and
used a more flexible P wave parametrization above the K antiK threshold and
included an estimation of the D2 wave inelasticity. The better accuracy thus
achieved also required a refinement of the Regge analysis above 1.42 GeV. We
have checked that the pipi scattering amplitudes obtained in this approach
satisfy remarkably well forward dispersion relations and Roy's equations.

We improve, in the energy region between $\bar{K}K$ threshold and $\sim~1.4$
GeV, the energydependent phase shift analysis of $\pi\pi$ scattering presented
in a previous paper. For the S0 wave we have included more data above
$\bar{K}K$ threshold and we have taken into account systematically the
elasticity data on the reaction $\pi\pi\to\bar{K}K$. We here made a coupled
channel fit. For the D0 wave we have considered information on low energy
parameters, and imposed a better fit to the $f_2$ resonance. For both waves the
expressions we now find are substantially more precise than the previous ones.
We also provide slightly improved D2 and P waves, including the estimated
inelasticity for the first, and a more flexible parametrization between 1 and
1.42 GeV for the second. The accuracy of our amplitudes is now such that it
requires a refinement of the Regge analysis, for $s^{1/2}\geq1.42$ GeV, which
we also carry out. We show that this more realistic input produces $\pi\pi$
scattering amplitudes that satisfy better forward dispersion relations,
particularly for $\pi^0\pi^0$ scattering.

The pion scalar radius is given by $<r^2_S>=(6/\pi)\int_{4M^2_\pi}^\infty{\rm
d}t \delta_S(t)/t^2$, with $\delta_S$ the phase of the scalar form factor.
Below $\bar{K}K$ threshold, $\delta_S=\delta_0$, $\delta_0$ being the
isoscalar, Swave $\pi\pi$ phase shift. Between $\bar{K}K$ threshold and
$t^{1/2}\sim 1.5 {\rm GeV}$
I argued, in two previous letters, that one can approximate
$\delta_S\sim\delta_0$, because inelasticity is small, compared with the
errors. This gives $<r^2_S>=0.75\pm0.07 {\rm fm}^2$ and the value
$\bar{l}_4=5.4\pm0.5$ for the oneloop chiral perturbation theory constant,
compared with the values given by Leutwyler and collaborators,
$<r^2_S>=0.61\pm0.04 {\rm fm}^2$ and $\bar{l}_4=4.4\pm0.3$. At high energy,
$t^{1/2}>1.5 {\rm GeV}$, I remarked that the value of $\delta_S$ that follows
from perturbative QCD agrees with my interpolation and disagrees with that of
Leutwyler and collaborators. In a recent article, Caprini, Colangelo and
Leutwyler claim that my estimate of the asymptotic phase $\delta_S$ is
incorrect as it neglects higher twist contributions. Here I remark that, when
correctly calculated, higher twist contributions are likely negligible. I also
show that chiral perturbation theory gives $\bar{l}_4=6.60\pm0.43$, compatible
with my estimate but widely off the value $\bar{l}_4=4.4\pm0.3$ of Leutwyler
and collaborators.

We present a new, completely revised calculation of the muon anomalous
magnetic moment, $a_\mu=(g_{\mu}2)/2$, comparing it with the more recent
experimental determination of this quantity; this furnishes an important test
of theories of strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions. These theoretical
and experimental determinations give the very precise numbers, $$10^{11}\times
a_\mu=\cases{116 591 806\pm50\pm10 ({\rm rad.})\pm30
(\ell\times\ell)\quad\hbox{[Th., no $\tau$]}\cr 116 591 889\pm49\pm10 ({\rm
rad.})\pm30 (\ell\times\ell)\quad\hbox{[Theory, $\tau$]}\cr 116 592
080\pm60\quad\hbox{[Experiment]}.\cr}$$ In the theoretical evaluations, the
first quantity does not, and the second one does, use information from $\tau$
decay. The first errors for the theoretical evaluations include statistical
plus systematic errors; the other ones are the estimated errors due to
incomplete treatment of radiative corrections and the estimated error in the
lightbylight scattering contribution. We thus have a significant mismatch
between theory and experiment. We also use part of the theoretical calculations
to give a precise evaluation of the electromagnetic coupling on the $Z$,
$\bar{\alpha}_{\rm Q.E.D.}(M^2_{Z})$, of the masses and widths of the (charged
and neutral) rho resonances, of the scattering length and effective range for
the P wave in $\pi\pi$ scattering, and of the quadratic radius and second
coefficient of the pion form factor.

The pion scalar radius is given by $<r^2_S>=(6/\pi)\int_{4M^2_\pi}^\infty{\rm
d}s \delta_S(s)/s^2$, with $\delta_S$ the phase of the scalar form factor.
Below $\bar{K}K$ threshold, $\delta_S=\delta_\pi$, $\delta_\pi$ being the
isoscalar, Swave $\pi\pi$ phase shift. At high energy, $s>2 {\rm GeV}^2$,
$\delta_S$ is given by perturbative QCD. In between I argued, in a previous
letter, that one can interpolate $\delta_S\sim\delta_\pi$, because inelasticity
is small, compared with the errors. This gives $<r^2_S>=0.75\pm0.07 {\rm
fm}^2$. Recently, Ananthanarayan, Caprini, Colangelo, Gasser and Leutwyler
(ACCGL) have claimed that this is incorrect and one should have instead
$\delta_S\simeq\delta_\pi\pi$; then $<r^2_S>=0.61\pm0.04 {\rm fm}^2$. Here I
show that the ACCGL phase $\delta_S$ is pathological in that it is
discontinuous for small inelasticity, does not coincide with what perturbative
QCD suggests at high energy, and only occurs because these authors take a value
for $\delta_\pi(4m^2_K)$ different from what experiment indicates. If one uses
the value for $\delta_\pi(4m^2_K)$ favoured by experiment, the ensuing phase
$\delta_S$ is continuous, agrees with perturbative QCD expectations, and
satisfies $\delta_S\simeq\delta_\pi$, thus confirming the correctness of my
previous estimate,
$<r^2_S>=0.75\pm0.07 {\rm fm}^2$.

We obtain reliable $\pi\pi$ scattering amplitudes consistent with
experimental data, both at low and high energies, and fulfilling appropriate
analyticity properties. We do this by first fitting experimental low energy
($s^{1/2}\leq1.42 {\rm GeV}$) phase shifts and inelasticities with expressions
that incorporate analyticity and unitarity. In particular, for the S wave with
isospin~0, we discuss in detail several sets of experimental data. This
provides low energy partial wave amplitudes that summarize the known
experimental information. Then, we impose Regge behaviour as follows from
factorization and experimental data for the imaginary parts of the scattering
amplitudes at higher energy, and check fulfillment of dispersion relations up
to 0.925 GeV. This allows us to improve our fits. The ensuing $\pi\pi$
scattering amplitudes are then shown to verify dispersion relations up to 1.42
GeV, as well as $s  t  u$ crossing sum rules and other consistency
conditions. The improved parametrizations therefore provide a reliable
representation of pionpion amplitudes with which one can test chiral
perturbation theory calculations, pionium decays, or use as input for
CPviolating $K$ decays. In this respect, we find
$[a_0^{(0)}a_0^{(2)}]^2=(0.077\pm0.008) M^{1}_\pi$ and
$\delta_0^{(0)}(m^2_K)\delta_0^{(2)}(m^2_K)=52.9\pm1.6^{\rm o}$.

We consider the $\pi\pi$ scattering amplitude obtained by Colangelo, Gasser
and Leutwyler (CGL), using dispersion relations and chiral perturbation theory
to two loops. We point out that the input used by CGL for energies above 1.42
GeV is incompatible with a number of experimental results. Moreover, the error
they adscribe to the $\delta_0^{(0)}$ phase at 0.8 GeV, an important part of
their input, is much underestimated, and its central value is probably
displaced. Then, we compare CGL results with direct fits to experimental
$\pi\pi$ data; the outcome of this test is mismatch of the CGL amplitude, for
several quantities by as much as 4 standard deviations. We also evaluate
forward dispersion relations with the CGL amplitudes. We find that these
dispersion relations are fulfilled less and less well as the energy increases
towards 0.8 GeV. Moreover, the size that the experimental results for $\pi\pi$
scattering indicates for the two loop corrections in a chiral perturbation
theory analysis is less than those required by CGL, which suggests that at
least some of the CGL corrections are so large to cover biases in their
$\pi\pi$ amplitude and in the evaluation of the scalar form factor of the pion.
We conclude on the necessity of repeating the analysis of CGL with correct
high energy amplitudes and a more realistic input for the $\delta_0^{(0)}$
phase at 0.8 GeV.

We show that a generalized Regge behaviour, $$Im F(s,t)\simeq \Phi(t)(\log
s/\hat{s})^{\nu(t)}(s/\hat{s})^{\alpha_P(t)},\quad{\rm for} t<t_0,
s\to\infty$$ where $\Phi(t)\simeq e^{bt}$, $\alpha_P(t)\simeq
\alpha_P(0)+\alpha'_P(0)t$, and $t_0$ is the first zero of $\alpha_P(t)$,
$\alpha_P(t_0)=0$, implies that the corresponding cross section is bounded by
$$\sigma_{\rm tot}(s)<({\rm Const.})\times\log s/\hat{s}.$$ This growth,
however, is not sufficient to fit the experimental cross sections. If, instead
of this, we assume saturation of the improved Froissart bound, i.e., a
behaviour $$Im F(s,0)\simeq A(s/\hat{s})\log^2{{s}\over{s_1\log^{7/2} s/s_2}},
$$ a good fit is obtained to $\pi\pi$, $\pi N$, $KN$ and $NN$ cross sections
from c.m. kinetic energy $E_{\rm kin}\simeq1 $ GeV to 30 TeV (producing a cross
section of $108\pm6$ mb at LHC energy). This suggests that the Reggetype
behaviour only holds for values of the momentum transfer very near zero.

We consider the quadratic scalar radius of the pion, $<r^2_{{\rm S},\pi}>$,
and the mixed $K\pi$ scalar radius, $<r^2_{{\rm S},K\pi}>$. With respect to
the second, we point out that the more recent (post1974) experimental results
in $K_{l3}$ decays imply a value, $<r^2_{{\rm S},K\pi}>=0.31\pm0.06 {\rm
fm}^2$, which is about $2 \sigma$ above estimates based on chiral perturbation
theory. On the other hand, we show that this value of $<r^2_{{\rm S},K\pi}>$
suggests the existence of a low mass S$\tfrac{1}{2}$ $K\pi$ resonance. With
respect to $<r^2_{{\rm S},\pi}>$, we contest the central value and accuracy of
current evaluations, that give $<r^2_{{\rm S},\pi}>=0.61\pm0.04 {\rm fm}^2$.
Based on experiment, we find a robust lower bound of $<r^2_{{\rm
S},\pi}>\geq0.70\pm0.06 {\rm fm}^2$ and a reliable estimate, $<r^2_{{\rm
S},\pi}>=0.75\pm0.07 {\rm fm}^2$, where the error bars are attainable. This
implies, in particular, that the chiral result for $<r^2_{{\rm S},\pi}>$ is
$1.4 \sigma$ away from experiment. We also comment on implications about the
chiral parameter $\bar{l}_4$, very likely substantially larger (and with larger
errors) than usually assumed.

In these notes we present an introductory review on various topics about low
energy pion physics (some kaon physics is discussed as well). Among these, we
include the uses of analyticity and unitarity to describe partial wave
amplitudes (for which we give accurate and economical parametrizations) and
form factors; (forward) dispersion relations; and the use of the
FroissartGribov representation to evaluate accurately the low energy
parameters (scattering lengths and effective ranges) for higher ($l\geq1$)
waves. Finally, we describe some pion physics in QCD and then pass on to study
the nonlinear sigma model, and the chiral perturbation theory approach to low
energy pion interactions.\hb \indent Most of the results presented here are
well known, but we also give a set of state of the art, precise determinations
of some scattering lengths as well as an independent calculation of three of
the parameters $\bar{l}_2$, $\bar{l}_4$, $\bar{l}_6$
(to one loop), and one $\bar{f}_2$, to two loops, that appear in chiral
perturbation theory. The S waves are discussed and compared with chiral
perturbation theory expectations, and the same is done for larger $l$
scattering lengths and effective range parameters. Also new is the evaluation
of some electromagnetic corrections.

We calculate the combination $2a_0^{(0)}5a_0^{(2)}$ (the Olsson sum rule)
and the scattering lengths and effective ranges $a_1$, $a_2^{(I)}$ and $b_1$,
$b_2^{(I)}$ dispersively (with the FroissartGribov representation) using, at
low energy, the phase shifts for $\pi\pi$ scattering obtained by Colangelo,
Gasser and Leutwyler (CGL) from the Roy equations and chiral perturbation
theory, plus experiment and Regge behaviour at high energy, or directly, using
the CGL parameters for $a$s and $b$s. We find mismatch, both among the CGL
phases themselves and with the results obtained from the pion form factor. This
reaches the level of several (2 to 5) standard deviations, and is essentially
independent of the details of the intermediate energy region ($0.82\leq E\leq
1.42$ GeV) and, in some cases, of the high energy behaviour assumed. We discuss
possible reasons for this mismatch, in particular in connection with an
alternate set of phase shifts.

We present a review of the masses (except for neutrino masses) and
interaction strengths in the standard model. Special emphasis is put on
quantities that have been determined with significantly improved precision in
the last few years. In particular, a number of determinations of $\alpha_s$ and
the electromagnetic coupling on the $Z$, $\alpha_{\rm QED}(M_Z^2)$ are
presented and their implications for the Higgs mass discussed; the best
prediction that results for this last quantity being $$M_H=102^{+54}_{36}
GeV/c^2.$$ Besides this, we also discuss a few extra precision tests of the
standard model: the electron magnetic moment and dipole moment, and the muon
magnetic moment.

We perform a new calculation of the hadronic contributions, $a({\rm
Hadronic})$ to the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, $a_\mu$. For the low
energy contributions of order $\alpha^2$ we carry over an analysis of the pion
form factor $F_\pi(t)$ using recent data both on $e^+e^\to\pi^+\pi^$ and
$\tau^+\to \bar{\nu}_\tau \pi^+\pi^0$. In this analysis we take into account
that the phase of the form factor is equal to that of $\pi\pi$ scattering. This
allows us to profit fully from analyticity properties so we can use also
experimental information on $F_\pi(t)$ at spacelike $t$. At higher energy we
use QCD to supplement experimental data, including the recent measurements of
$e^+e^\to {\rm hadrons}$ both around 1 GeV and near the $\bar{c}c$ threshold.
This yields a precise determination of the $O(\alpha^2)$ and
$O(\alpha^2)+O(\alpha^3)$ hadronic part of the photon vacuum polarization
pieces, $$10^{11}\times a^{(2)}({\rm h.v.p.})=6 909\pm64;\quad 10^{11}\times
a^{(2+3)}({\rm h.v.p.})=7 002\pm66$$ As byproducts we also get the masses and
widths of the $\rho^0, \rho^+$, and very accurate values for the charge radius
and second coefficient of the pion. Adding the remaining order $\alpha^3$
hadronic contributions we find $$10^{11}\times a^{\rm theory}(\hbox{Hadronic})=
6 993\pm69\quad(e^+e^ + \tau + {\rm spacel.})$$ The figures given are obtained
including $\tau$ decay data. This is to be compared with the recent
experimental value, $$10^{11}\times a^{\rm exp.}(\hbox{Hadronic})=7
174\pm150.$$

We perform a new, detailed calculation of the hadronic contributions to the
running electromagnetic coupling, $\bar{\alpha}$, defined on the Z particle (91
GeV). We find for the hadronic contribution, including radiative corrections,
$$10^5\times \deltav_{\rm had.}\alpha(M_Z^2)= 2740\pm12,$$ or, excluding the
top quark contribution, $$10^5\times \deltav_{\rm had.}\alpha^{(5)}(M_Z^2)=
2747\pm12.$$
Adding the pure QED corrections we get a value for the running
electromagnetic coupling of $$\bar{\alpha}_{\rm Q.E.D.}(M_Z^2)=
{{1}\over{128.965\pm0.017}}.$$

We present a summary of the results of two recent precise calculations of the
muon anomalous magnetic moment ($g_{\mu}2$) and the electromagnetic coupling
on the $Z$ ($\bar{\alpha}_{\rm Q.E.D.}(M^2_{Z})$). The main sources of
uncertainty are underlined.

We remark that the precision of recent determinations of $\alpha_s(M^2_Z)$ is
such that one can get bounds on supersymmetric partner masses (squark and
gluino) by requiring consistency of determinations of $\alpha_s$ at "low"
energies, where those particles do not contribute, and on the $Z$ peak. For
approximately degenerate squarks and gluinos with mass $\widetilde{m}$, we find
the bound $\widetilde{m}\geq 173$ GeV, at the $2\sigma$ level. At the
$2.5\sigma$ level, $\widetilde{m}\geq 121$ GeV.