the gravitational interaction of two massive particles is described by newton s law @xmath0 which is a good approximation for the motion of nonrelativistic particles at large separations .
einstein s theory of general relativity , however , predicts important corrections that have been verified experimentally , _
e.g. _ , in measurements of the precession of the perihelion of mercury @xcite .
this effect can be calculated from the famous einstein - infeld - hoffmann lagrangian @xcite where the terms beyond newtonian physics stem from the relativistic @xmath1 corrections to the kinetic energy , from relativistic @xmath1 corrections to the newtonian potential and from a new piece of the potential proportional to @xmath2 which may be regarded as an @xmath3 correction to the leading newtonian potential .
the two small expansion parameters here are @xmath4 and @xmath5 which for bound states are related due to the virial theorem .
we , however , will examine scattering processes wherein the classical expansion parameters @xmath4 and @xmath5 are independent , and our focus will be on the components that vanish in the nonrelativistic limit @xmath6 .
in the weak field limit gravitational dynamics can be described in terms of a quantum field theory which is based on expanding around flat minkowski spacetime and quantizing the metric fluctuation in terms of a massless spin-2 field  the graviton .
the resulting theory is an effective field theory whose predictions are trustworthy only for energies much smaller than the planck scale .
nevertheless , one can in this picture calculate well - defined quantum predictions as well as classical corrections to newtonian physics .
donoghue has pioneered the use of the effective field theory of gravity to extract the leading long distance effects in the nonrelativistic limit @xcite ( see @xcite and @xcite for reviews ) which yield corrections of the form @xmath7 where @xmath8 and @xmath9 are the coefficients of the classical and quantum corrections respectively and are evaluated below .
note that while the classical expansion parameter @xmath10 can give measurable effects for macroscopic objects ( where a large factor multiplies a tiny factor ) , the quantum corrections which scale as @xmath11 are clearly tiny and phenomenologically irrelevant for macroscopic systems .
the calculations of these leading long distance corrections are performed by evaluating the leading nonanalytic components of the scattering amplitude at one loop level , where @xmath12 effects first arise , and by defining a potential in terms of the fourier transform of this amplitude .
once spin is introduced into the calculation , additional interaction structures arise , such as a spin - orbit coupling and a spin - spin coupling . the leading effects of order @xmath13 stemming from the tree level one - graviton exchange process give rise to the familiar geodetic precession and to the lense - thirring effect @xcite . at the two - graviton exchange level ,
classical @xmath14 and quantum @xmath15 corrections to these leading spin - dependent interactions arise and are calculated as part of our work .
in earlier work on loop corrections to the form factors of graviton couplings it was found that the long distance corrections to the spin - independent interactions have the same form for scalars , spin-1/2 fermions and for spin-1 bosons @xcite .
these nlo form factor interactions constitute one component of the calculation of the full scattering amplitude at the two - graviton exchange level , so the question arises as to whether the _ full _ scattering amplitude also exhibits such universalities , whereby the form of the corrections to the spin - independent newtonian potential is independent of the spins of the scattered particles  in other words , are the coefficients @xmath8 and @xmath9 in eq .
( [ eq_pot_cor ] ) independent of spin ?
this then is the goal of the present work  to evaluate the gravitational scattering of two massive particles having various spins , in order to check previous work and to verify the universality hypothesis . in the next section
then we review our calculational methods and reproduce the long range gravitational scattering amplitude in the case of a pair of spinless particles . in the following sections
, we generalize these methods to the cases of spin-0
spin-1/2 , spin-0  spin-1 and spin-1/2  spin-1/2 scattering and demonstrate both the expected universality as well as novel spin - dependent interactions .
we summarize our work and draw general implications in a brief concluding section . appendix [
app_iter ] encapsulates parts of our calculational methods while we refer to our companion paper on long distance effects in electromagnetic scattering @xcite for many of the details such as the required feynman integrals , the fourier transformations etc . in appendix [ app_eom ]
we demonstrate how the classical equations of motion in the form of the einstein - infeld - hoffmann lagrangian can be extracted from our results .
we first set the kinematic framework for our study .
we consider the gravitational scattering of two non - identical particles
particle @xmath16 with mass @xmath17 , and incoming four - momentum @xmath18 and particle @xmath19 with mass @xmath20 , and incoming four - momentum @xmath21 .
after interacting the final four - momentum of particle @xmath16 is @xmath22 and that of particle @xmath19 is @xmath23_cf .
[ fig_kinem ] .
now we need to be more specific .
we begin by examining the gravitational scattering of two spinless particles .
the gravitational coupling of a spin-0 particle is found by expanding the minimally coupled scalar field matter lagrangian @xmath24 in terms of the gravitational field @xmath25 which is a small fluctuation of the metric about flat minkowski space defined as @xmath26 with @xmath27 .
the inclusion of this factor @xmath28 in the definition of the graviton field @xmath29 gives this field a mass - dimension of unity and thus yields a kinetic term of standard normalization without a dimensionful parameter .
for matter interactions , this choice is convenient since the order of @xmath28 keeps track of the number of gravitons involved in an interaction .
once the action is written in terms of the expansion of the graviton field , all indices are understood to be lowered or raised using the minkowski metric @xmath30 .
we also require the expansion of the inverse metric and square root of the determinant of the metric tensor @xmath31 then , expanding in powers of @xmath28 , we find @xmath32\nonumber\\ \sqrt{-g}{\cal l}_m^{(2)}&=&{\kappa^2\over 2 } \hspace*{0.5pt } \bigg[\frac{1}{4 } \big(h^2 - 2 h_{\mu \nu } h^{\mu \nu}\big ) \bigg(\frac{1}{2 } \partial_\alpha \phi \partial^\alpha \phi - \frac{1}{2 } m^2 \phi^2\bigg)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{13pt } + \bigg(h^{\mu \alpha } h_\alpha^\nu - \frac{1}{2 } h h^{\mu \nu}\bigg ) \partial_\mu \phi \partial_\nu \phi \bigg]\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath33 represents the trace and the one- and two - graviton vertices are identified as        @xmath34\nonumber\\ { } ^{0 } \tau^{(2)}_{\mu\nu,\rho\sigma}(p_2 , p_1 , m)\hspace*{-7.5pt}&=\hspace*{-7.5pt } & \frac{i\kappa^2}{2}\bigg[2 i_{\mu\nu,\kappa\zeta}{i^\zeta}_{\lambda,\rho\sigma}(p_1^\kappa p_2^\lambda+p_1^\lambda p_2^\kappa ) \nonumber\\ & & { } \hspace*{14pt } - \hspace*{-1pt } ( \hspace*{-0.5pt } \eta_{\mu\nu}i_{\kappa\lambda,\rho\sigma } \hspace*{-1.5pt } + \hspace*{-1.5pt } \eta_{\rho\sigma}i_{\kappa\lambda,\mu\nu}\hspace*{-0.5pt } ) p_1^\kappa p_2^\lambda \hspace*{-1pt } - \hspace*{-1pt } p_{\mu\nu , \rho\sigma } ( p_1 \hspace*{-1.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-1.3pt } p_2 \hspace*{-1.8pt } - \hspace*{-1.5pt } m^2 ) \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ]   \label{eq : tp}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have defined @xmath35    the purely gravitational dynamics are derived from the einstein - hilbert action @xmath36 where higher dimensional operators such as @xmath37 , which are needed when performing renormalization , are not relevant here @xcite . since general relativity is invariant under _ local _ coordinate transformations , it is a gauge theory and one must deal with the subtleties that arise in the quantization of gauge theories  we have to perform gauge fixing .
the procedure works analogously to gauge fixing in yang - mills theories .
furthermore , we will make use of the background field method , which provides a powerful organizational scheme for the quantization of the effective field theory of gravity : keeping the background metric general instead of restricting to the flat minkowski metric , we use the expansion @xmath38 where @xmath39 is the classical background metric ( or field ) and @xmath40 is the quantum field . a gauge fixing condition is only imposed on the quantum field @xmath40 , leaving the general covariance of the background unaffected . this procedure has the advantage of ensuring that the resulting theory can be renormalized , since the loop expansion then has the same symmetry properties as the action
.    moreover , the background field method greatly simplifies calculations involving graviton loops .
gravitons running in loops must be derived from from an expansion involving the quantum field @xmath40 whereas gravitons that are _ not _ within a loop may be derived from expanding the background field @xmath41 where @xmath42 denotes an `` external '' graviton , _
i.e. _ , a graviton that is not inside a loop . at the one loop level , at
most two gravitons involved in a vertex are propagating within a loop , which allows us to use a gauge fixing condition _ linear _ in the quantum field @xmath40 and greatly simplifies the derivation of both the triple graviton vertex and the vertex that couples one graviton to the ghost fields .    in order to fix the gauge ,
we will use the harmonic gauge @xmath43 where @xmath44 denotes the covariant derivative on the background metric .
this condition leads to an additional gauge fixing piece of the action @xmath45 as well as the ghost action @xmath46 where @xmath47 is the ghost field that annihilates a ghost particle while @xmath48 creates a ghost particle .
for each closed ghost loop .
]    now we are in the position to derive the feynman rules for the effective field theory of gravity .
the complete quantum gravitational action consists of three components @xmath49 and we will illustrate the use of the background field method during the derivations of the feynman rules . when deriving the graviton propagator we expand the action to second order in the quantum fields @xmath40 and to zeroth order in the external gravitons @xmath42 and the ghosts , yielding @xmath50 we obtain the ghost propagator expanding the action to second order in the ghost fields and to zeroth order in the gravitons , whereby @xmath51 our triple graviton vertex is obtained by expanding to second order in the quantum fields @xmath40 , to first order in the background gravitons @xmath42 , and to zeroth order in the ghost fields and reads        @xmath52\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{17pt } + 2q_\lambda q_\sigma \hspace*{-1pt }   \bigg[i^{\lambda\sigma,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i^{\mu\nu,}{}_{\gamma\delta }    + i^{\lambda\sigma,}{}_{\gamma\delta}i^{\mu\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta } \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{54pt } -i^{\lambda\mu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i^{\sigma\nu,}{}_{\gamma\delta }   -i^{\sigma\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i^{\lambda\mu,}{}_{\gamma\delta}\bigg]\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{17pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg [   q_\lambda q^\mu(\eta_{\alpha\beta}i^{\lambda\nu,}{}_{\gamma\delta } \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } \eta_{\gamma\delta}i^{\lambda\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta } ) \hspace*{-2pt }   + \hspace*{-1pt } q_\lambda q^\nu(\eta_{\alpha\beta}i^{\lambda\mu,}{}_{\gamma\delta } \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } \eta_{\gamma\delta}i^{\lambda\mu,}{}_{\alpha\beta})\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{24pt } - q^2 \hspace*{-0.6pt } ( \hspace*{-0.5pt } \eta_{\alpha\beta}i^{\mu\nu,}{}_{\gamma\delta }
\hspace*{-1.5pt } + \hspace*{-1.5pt } \eta_{\gamma\delta } i^{\mu\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta } \hspace*{-0.5pt } ) \hspace*{-2.3pt }   - \hspace*{-1.5pt } \eta^{\mu\nu } q^\lambda q^\sigma \hspace*{-0.6pt } ( \hspace*{-0.5pt } \eta_{\alpha\beta } i_{\gamma\delta,\lambda\sigma } \hspace*{-2pt } + \hspace*{-1.5pt } \eta_{\gamma\delta } i_{\alpha\beta,\lambda\sigma}\hspace*{-0.5pt } ) \hspace*{-1.5pt } \bigg]\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{17pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg[2q^\lambda \big(i^{\sigma\nu,}{}_{\gamma\delta }
i_{\alpha\beta,\lambda\sigma}k^\mu + i^{\sigma\mu,}{}_{\gamma\delta}i_{\alpha\beta,\lambda\sigma}k^\nu \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{50pt } -i^{\sigma\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i_{\gamma\delta,\lambda\sigma}(k+q)^\mu   - i^{\sigma\mu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i_{\gamma\delta,\lambda\sigma}(k+q)^\nu \big ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{24pt } + q^2(i^{\sigma\mu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i_{\gamma\delta,\sigma}{}^\nu + i_{\alpha\beta,\sigma}{}^\nu i^{\sigma\mu,}{}_{\gamma\delta } ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{24pt } + \eta^{\mu\nu}q^\lambda q_\sigma ( i_{\alpha\beta,\lambda\rho}i^{\rho\sigma,}{}_{\gamma\delta } + i_{\gamma\delta,\lambda\rho}i^{\rho\sigma,}{}_{\alpha\beta})\bigg]\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{17pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg[\hspace*{-0.5pt } \big(k^2 \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } ( k \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } q)^2 \big ) \hspace*{-3pt } \left ( \hspace*{-2pt } i^{\sigma\mu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i_{\gamma\delta,\sigma}{}^\nu \hspace*{-1pt }   + \hspace*{-1pt } i^{\sigma\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i_{\gamma\delta,\sigma}{}^\mu \hspace*{-1pt } - \hspace*{-1pt } { 1\over 2}\eta^{\mu\nu}p_{\alpha\beta,\gamma\delta } \hspace*{-2pt } \right ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{24pt } - \big((k+q)^2\eta_{\alpha\beta}i^{\mu\nu,}{}_{\gamma\delta}+k^2\eta_{\gamma\delta } i^{\mu\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}\big)\bigg]\bigg\}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the graviton with lorentz indices @xmath53 represents a background graviton , and therefore , it is _ not _ to be used within any loop ! in the amplitude . ]
the final missing feynman rule from the purely gravitational action is the vertex coupling one graviton to two ghost fields which we derive by expanding to second order in the ghost fields and to first order in @xmath42        @xmath54\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the graviton with lorentz indices @xmath53 is again a background graviton and not to be used as part of any loop .
we begin our calculation with the simplest tree level single - graviton exchange which leads to the amplitude . ]
\nonumber\\ \quad\end{aligned}\ ] ] a convenient way to define the nonrelativistic potential is as the fourier transform of the nonrelativistic center of mass scattering amplitude .
we utilize a symmetric center of mass frame with incoming momenta @xmath56 and @xmath57 and with outgoing momenta @xmath58 and @xmath59 .
conservation of energy then requires @xmath60 so that @xmath61 for @xmath62 and @xmath63 . in the nonrelativistic limit
@xmath64 the lowest order amplitude reads @xmath65 \nonumber \\ & + & g \pi \left[\frac{3(m_a^2 + m_b^2)}{2 m_a m_b } + \frac{\vec p^{\hspace*{1.4pt } 2}}{m_a m_b } \left(3 - \frac{5(m_a^2 + m_b^2)^2}{4 m_a^2 m_b^2}\right ) + \ldots \right ] + \ldots \nonumber \\ \label{eq_amplo_00}\end{aligned}\ ] ] yielding the potential @xmath66 \nonumber \\ & & + \ , g
\pi \delta^3(\vec r ) \left[\frac{3(m_a^2 + m_b^2)}{2 m_a m_b } + \frac{\vec p^{\hspace*{1.4pt } 2}}{m_a m_b}\left(3 - \frac{5(m_a^2 + m_b^2)^2}{4 m_a^2 m_b^2}\right ) + \ldots \right ] \nonumber\\ \label{eq : po}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the leading component of eq .
( [ eq : po ] ) is recognized as the usual newtonian potential ( accompanied by a small kinematic correction ) while the second piece is a short range modification .
our purpose in this paper is to study the long distance corrections to this lowest order potential which arise from the two - graviton exchange diagrams shown in fig .
[ fig_loops ]
. this problem has been previously studied by iwasaki using noncovariant perturbation theory @xcite , and by khriplovich and kirilin @xcite and by bjerrum - bohr , donoghue , and holstein @xcite using conventional feynman diagrams .
our approach will be similar to that used in @xcite and @xcite .
that is , using the ideas of effective field theory , we evaluate these feynman diagrams by keeping only the leading nonanalytic structure in @xmath67 , since it is these pieces that lead to the long range corrections to the potential while components analytic in @xmath67 only yield short range contributions , _
i.e. _ , delta functions or derivatives of delta functions .
the leading nonanalytic behavior is of two basic forms    * terms in @xmath68 which are @xmath69-independent and therefore classical * terms in @xmath70 which are @xmath69-dependent and therefore quantum mechanical .
the former terms , when fourier transformed lead to corrections to the nonrelativistic potential of the form @xmath71 while the latter lead to @xmath72 corrections . for typical masses and separations
the quantum mechanical forms are themselves numerically insignificant .
however , they are intriguing in that their origin appears to be associated with zitterbewegung .
that is , classically we can define the potential by measuring the energy when two objects are separated by distance @xmath73 .
however , in the quantum mechanical case the distance between two objects is uncertain by an amount of order the compton wavelength due to zero point motion@xmath74 .
this leads to the replacement @xmath75 which is the form found in our calculations .
the diagrams to be evaluated are shown in fig . [ fig_loops ] where the `` blobs '' shown in diagrams ( f ) and ( g ) are explained in fig .
[ fig_blobs ] .
the calculational details including the feynman integrals are described in an appendix of our companion paper on electromagnetic scattering @xcite . here
we present only the results . defining differs slightly from previous publications @xcite in
that it does not include a factor of mass in the numerator . ]
@xmath76 we have , from diagrams [ fig_loops](a)-(g ) respectively @xmath77\nonumber\\ { } ^0{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}b}^{(2)}(q)&=&g^2m_am_b\left[28l + 8 m_a s\right]\nonumber\\ { } ^0{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}c}^{(2)}(q)&=&g^2m_am_b\left[28l + 8 m_b s\right]\nonumber\\ { } ^0{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}d}^{(2)}(q)&=&g^2 m_a m_b \left[\hspace*{-0.5pt } \left(\frac{4 m_a m_b}{q^2}+\frac{8(m_a^2 + m_b^2)}{m_a m_b } - 8\right ) \hspace*{-1.5pt } l + \hspace*{-0.5pt}4 ( m_a + m_b ) s \right]\nonumber\\ & -&i 4\pi g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 \hspace*{1pt } { l\over q^2 } \sqrt{m_a m_b \over s - s_0}\nonumber\\ { } ^0{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}e}^{(2)}(q)&=&g^2 m_a m_b \left[\hspace*{-0.5pt } \left(\hspace*{-1.5pt } - \frac{4 m_a m_b}{q^2}- \frac{8(m_a^2 + m_b^2)}{m_a m_b } - \frac{70}{3}\right ) \hspace*{-1.5pt } l - \hspace*{-0.5pt}4 ( m_a \hspace*{-0.5pt } + \hspace*{-0.5pt } m_b ) s \right]\nonumber\\ { } ^0{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}f}(q)&=&g^2m_am_b\left[14
l - 2 ( m_a + m_b ) s\right]\nonumber\\ { } ^0{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}g}(q)&=&g^2m_am_b\left[-{43\over 15 } l \right]\quad\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath78 is the square of the center of mass energy and @xmath79 is its threshold value . the contributions from the form factor diagrams in fig .
[ fig_loops](f ) have been calculated both directly and using the results from @xcite , and the contribution from vacuum polarization diagrams in fig .
[ fig_loops](g ) have been obtained both by direct evaluation and by using previous results of t hooft and veltman @xcite for the divergences of the graviton self - energy that allow us to infer its nonanalytic contributions . here
we should note that _ any _ massless particle would contribute to the nonanalytic terms of the graviton vacuum energy since gravitons couple to anything .
we choose here not to include other massless particles besides the graviton  in particular we do not include the contribution of the photon in the quantum piece of our potential .
summing , we find the total result @xmath80-i4\pi g^2m_a^2m_b^2 \hspace*{1pt } { l\over q^2}\sqrt{m_am_b\over s - s_0}\label{eq : kp}\ ] ] and we observe that , in addition to the expected terms involving @xmath81 and @xmath82 , there arises a piece of the second order amplitude which is _ imaginary_. the origin of this imaginary piece is , of course , from the second born approximation to the newtonian potential , and reminds us that in order to define a proper correction to the first order newtonian potential we must subtract off such terms .
for this purpose we will work in the nonrelativistic limit and the center of mass frame@xmath83 as defined above .
we have then @xmath84 and @xmath85 where @xmath86 is the reduced mass and @xmath87-i4\pi g^2m_a^2m_b^2 \hspace*{1pt } { l\over q^2}{m_r\over p_0 } .\ ] ] for the iteration we shall use the simple potential @xmath88 which reproduces the long distance behavior of the lowest order amplitude for spin-0  spin-0 gravitational scattering  eq .
( [ eq : po])in the nonrelativistic limit
. we will employ the momentum space representation @xmath89 where we identify @xmath90 and @xmath91 , and the second born term is then @xmath92 where @xmath93 is the nonrelativistic propagator .
note that in eq .
( [ eq : iteration00a ] ) we take both the leading order potential as well as the total energies @xmath94 and @xmath95 in the nonrelativistic limit .
the remaining integration can be performed exactly , yielding ] @xmath96 which precisely reproduces the imaginary component of @xmath97 , as expected . in order to produce a properly defined second order potential @xmath98
we must then subtract this second order born term from the second order transition amplitude , yielding the result @xmath99\nonumber\\ & = & \int{d^3q\over ( 2\pi)^3}e^{-i\vec{q}\cdot\vec{r } } \hspace*{1pt } g^2 m_a m_b\left[-6s(m_a+m_b ) + { 41\over 5}l\right]\nonumber\\ & = & -{3g^2m_am_b(m_a+m_b)\over r^2 } -{41g^2m_am_b\hbar\over 10\pi r^3}\nonumber\\ \quad\label{eq : so}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the quantum mechanical@xmath100component of the second order potential given in eq .
( [ eq : so ] ) agrees with that previously given by bjerrum - bohr , donoghue , and holstein @xcite and by kirilin and khriplovich @xcite .
however , the classical@xmath101contribution quoted by iwasaki @xmath102 differs from that quoted above in eq .
( [ eq : so ] ) and by bjerrum - bohr et al . in @xcite .
the resolution of this issue was given by sucher , who pointed out that the classical term depends upon the precise definition of the first order potential used in the iteration @xcite .
moreover , it depends and on whether one uses relativistic forms of the leading order potentials and the propagator @xmath103 in the iteration . in modern terms , the potential depends on how one performs the matching_e.g .
_ , iwasaki @xcite performs an off - shell matching while we match on - shell . in our companion paper on electromagnetic scattering @xcite
we have provided a more detailed discussion of these ambiguities .
use of the simple lowest order form eq .
( [ eq_lopot0momsp ] ) within a nonrelativistic iteration yields our result for the iteration amplitude given in eq . ( [ eq : iteration00b ] ) and is sufficient to remove the offending imaginary piece of the scattering amplitude . in appendix [ app_eom ] we derive an alternative form of the @xmath12 classical potential which results from an iteration that includes the leading relativistic corrections and which reproduces the classical equations of motion .    therefore , a unique definition of the potential does not exist . of course , the ambiguities in the form of the second order classical potential should not be a concern , since the potential is _ not _ an observable .
what _ is _ an observable is the on - shell transition amplitude , which is uniquely defined in each case as @xmath104+{}^0{\rm amp}_i(\vec{q})\ ] ] where the index @xmath105 denotes differing possible definitions of the potentials and the iteration .
thus we regard our potential as a nice way to display our resulting scattering amplitudes in coordinate space , but we emphasize that our main results are the long distance components of the scattering amplitude .
having determined the form of the potential for the spinless scattering case we move on to the case of scattering of particles carrying spin .
we begin with the scattering of a spinless particle @xmath16 from a spin-1/2 particle @xmath19 .
for the case of spin-1/2 we require some additional formalism in order to extract the gravitational couplings , which is necessary because the dirac algebra @xmath106 is defined with respect to the minkoswki flat space metric . in this case
the dirac matter lagrangian coupled to gravity reads @xmath107\psi\ ] ] and involves the vierbein @xmath108 which links global coordinates with those in a locally flat space .
the vierbein is in some sense the `` square root '' of the metric tensor @xmath109 and satisfies the relations @xmath110 the covariant derivative is @xmath111 with @xmath112 $ ] and the partial derivative @xmath113 acts only on spinors and in such a way that @xmath114 putting everything together , we find then @xmath115\psi.\ ] ] the spin connection @xmath116 can be derived in terms of vierbeins by requiring @xmath117 and by antisymmetrization in @xmath118 in order to get rid of christoffel symbols .
the result is : @xmath119 in order to derive the feynman rules we expand the ingredients in eq .
( [ lagrangian12 ] ) that contain graviton couplings , that is we need @xmath108 and @xmath116 expanded up to @xmath120 @xmath121 after these expansions are employed , we no longer need to distinguish between latin lorentz indeces and greek covariant indices and can use the minkowski metric to lower and raise all indices .
the matter lagrangian then has the expansion(note here that our conventions are @xmath122 and @xmath123 ) @xmath124 and the corresponding one- and two - graviton vertices are found to be        @xmath125\nonumber\\ { } ^{\frac{1}{2}}\tau_{\mu\nu,\rho\sigma}^{(2)}(p_2 , p_1 , m ) \hspace*{-8pt } & = \hspace*{-7.5pt } & i\kappa^2\bigg [ \hspace*{-1pt}-{1\over 2}\bigg({1\over 2}(\not \!{p}_1 \hspace*{1pt } + \ !
\not\!{p}_2)-m\bigg ) \hspace*{1pt } p_{\mu\nu,\rho\sigma}\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{20.3pt } { } - { 1\over 16}\bigg[\eta_{\mu\nu } \big(\gamma_\rho(p_1+p_2)_\sigma+\gamma_\sigma(p_1+p_2)_\rho\big ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{43.5pt } { } + \hspace*{-1pt } \eta_{\rho\sigma}\big(\gamma_\mu ( p_1+p_2)_\nu+\gamma_\nu(p_1+p_2)_\mu\big)\bigg ] \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{20.3pt } { } + { 3\over 16}(p_1+p_2)^{\epsilon}\rho^{\xi}(i_{\xi\phi,\mu\nu}{i^{\phi}}_{\epsilon,\rho\sigma } + i_{\xi\phi,\rho\sigma}{i^{\phi}}_{\epsilon,\mu\nu } ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{20.3pt } { } + { i\over 16}\epsilon^{\epsilon\phi\eta\lambda}\gamma_\lambda \gamma_5 \big(i_{\rho\sigma,\phi\xi } { i_{\mu\nu,\eta}}^\xi \hspace*{1pt } { k}_\epsilon - i_{\mu\nu,\phi\xi } { i_{\rho\sigma,\eta}}^\xi \hspace*{1pt } ( k+q)_\epsilon \big)\bigg ] .
\nonumber \\ \quad\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the tree level transition amplitude from one - graviton exchange is then @xmath126 .
\quad\end{aligned}\ ] ] defining the spin vector as @xmath127 we find the identity @xmath128\label{eq : id}\ ] ] whereupon the nonanalytic part of the transition amplitude in the thereshold limit @xmath129 can be written in the form @xmath130.\ ] ] in order to define the potential we require the nonrelativistic amplitude in the symmetric center of mass frame ( @xmath131 ) where @xmath132 @xmath133 and @xmath134 so that @xmath135\ ] ] and the lowest order potential becomes @xmath136 where @xmath137 is the angular momentum  the modification of the leading spin - independent potential has a spin - orbit character .    in order to determine the second order potential
, we must evaluate the one loop diagrams in fig . [ fig_loops ] . a subtlety that arises in the calculation involving spin
is that _ two _ independent kinematic variables arise : the momentum transfer @xmath67 and @xmath138 , which is to leading order proportional to @xmath139 ( where @xmath140 ) in the center of mass frame .
we find that our results differ if we perform an expansion first in @xmath138 and then in @xmath67 or vice versa .
this ordering issue occurs only for the box diagram , diagram ( d ) of fig .
[ fig_loops ] , where it stems from the reduction of vector and tensor box integrals .
their reduction in terms of scalar integrals involves the inversion of a matrix whose gram determinant vanishes in the nonrelativistic threshold limit @xmath141 .
more precisely , the denominators or the vector and tensor box integrals ( see appendix a in @xcite ) involve a factor of @xmath142 when expanded in the nonrelativistic limit . since @xmath143 with @xmath144 the scattering angle , we notice that @xmath145 unless we consider backward scattering where @xmath146 and where the scattering amplitude diverges . and
since @xmath139 originates from the relativistic structure @xmath138 , it is clear that we must first expand our vector and tensor box integrals in @xmath67 and then in @xmath147 . with this procedure , the contributions of the loop diagrams in fig .
[ fig_loops ] to the spin-0
spin-1/2 scattering amplitude read @xmath148\nonumber\\ { } ^{1\over 2}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}b}^{(2)}(q ) \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt}&g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[\bar{u}(p_4 ) u(p_3 ) ( - m_a s + 3 l ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + { 1\over m_a}\bar{u}(p_4 ) \ !
\not \!{p}_1u(p_3 ) ( 8 m_a s + 20 l ) \bigg]\nonumber\\ { } ^{1\over 2}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}c}^{(2)}(q )   \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt}&g^2 m_a m_b
\bigg[\bar{u}(p_4 ) u(p_3 ) ( 4 m_b s + 2 l ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + { 1\over m_a}\bar{u}(p_4 ) \ !
\not \!{p}_1u(p_3 ) ( 4 m_b s + 16 l ) \bigg]\nonumber\\ { } ^{1\over 2}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}d}^{(2)}(q )   \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt}&g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[\bar{u}(p_4)u(p_3 ) \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ( \ ! - \frac{4 m_a m_b}{q^2 } l- { m_am_b(3 m_a+4 m_b)\over s - s_0}s \nonumber\\ & &   \hspace*{98pt } - \hspace*{0.9pt } ( 6 m_a \hspace*{-2pt } + \hspace*{-2pt } 11 m_b ) s   \hspace*{-1pt } -   \hspace*{-1pt } \frac{42 m_a^2 \hspace*{-2pt } + \hspace*{-2pt } 23m_am_b \hspace*{-2pt } - \hspace*{-2pt } 4 m_b^2}{6m_am_b } l \hspace*{-1pt}\bigg)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + { 1\over m_a}\bar{u}(p_4 ) \ ! \not \!{p}_1u(p_3 ) \hspace*{-1pt}\bigg({8m_am_b\over q^2 } l + { m_am_b(3 m_a + 4 m_b)\over s - s_0 } s\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{131pt } +   ( 9 m_a+ 13 m_b ) s \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{131pt } +   \frac{153 m_a^2 - 44 m_a m_b + 88 m_b^2}{12 m_a m_b } l \bigg ) \bigg]\nonumber\\ & & - \ i 4\pi g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 \hspace*{1pt } { l\over q^2}\sqrt{m_a m_b\over s - s_0 } \left(2\ ,   { 1\over m_a}\bar{u}(p_4 ) \ ! \not
\!{p}_1u(p_3 ) - \bar{u}(p_4)u(p_3)\right)\nonumber\\ { } ^{1\over 2}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}e}^{(2)}(q )   \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt}&g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[\bar{u}(p_4)u(p_3 ) \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ( \frac{4 m_a m_b}{q^2 } l\nonumber\\ & &   \hspace*{98pt } + \frac{19 m_a}{4 } s   +   \frac{42 m_a^2 \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 21m_am_b \hspace*{-1pt } - \hspace*{-1pt } 4 m_b^2}{6m_am_b } l \hspace*{-1pt}\bigg)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + { 1\over m_a}\bar{u}(p_4 ) \ !
\not \!{p}_1u(p_3 ) \hspace*{-1pt}\bigg(- { 8m_am_b\over q^2 } l - \frac{33 m_a + 16 m_b}{4 } s \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{131pt } -   \frac{153 m_a^2 + 268 m_a m_b + 88 m_b^2}{12 m_a m_b } l \bigg ) \bigg]\nonumber\\ { } ^{1\over 2}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}f}^{(2)}(q ) \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt}&g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[\bar{u}(p_4 ) u(p_3 ) \bigg ( \ ! - \frac{3 m_a}{2 } s + 10 l\bigg ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + { 1\over m_a}\bar{u}(p_4 ) \ !
\not \!{p}_1u(p_3 ) \bigg ( \ ! - \frac{m_a + 4 m_b}{2 } s + 4 l \bigg ) \bigg]\nonumber\\ { } ^{1\over 2}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}g}^{(2)}(q ) \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt}&g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[\bar{u}(p_4 ) u(p_3 ) \hspace*{-0.5pt } \bigg(\hspace*{-2.5pt } - \hspace*{-1pt}\frac{1}{15 } l\bigg ) \hspace*{-1.5pt } + \hspace*{-0.5pt}{1\over m_a}\bar{u}(p_4 ) \ !
\not \!{p}_1u(p_3 ) \hspace*{-0.5pt } \bigg ( \hspace*{-2.5pt } - \hspace*{-1pt } \frac{42}{15}l\bigg ) \hspace*{-1pt}\bigg].\end{aligned}\ ] ] again , we have calculated the form factor diagrams in fig .
[ fig_loops](f ) both directly and via the results from @xcite .
summing , we find @xmath149\nonumber\\ & & - \ i 4\pi g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 \hspace*{1pt } { l\over q^2}\sqrt{m_a m_b\over s - s_0 } \left(- \bar{u}(p_4)u(p_3 ) + 2\ ,   { 1\over m_a}\bar{u}(p_4 ) \ !
\not \!{p}_1u(p_3 ) \right)\nonumber\\ \quad \label{eq : su}\end{aligned}\ ] ] using the identity eq . (
[ eq : id ] ) and @xmath150 eq . ( [ eq : su ] ) becomes @xmath151\nonumber\\ & & -i4\pi g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 \hspace*{1pt } { l\over q^2}\sqrt{m_a m_b\over s - s_0}\left(\bar{u}(p_4)u(p_3)+ { 2 i\over m_am_b^2}\epsilon_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta } p_1^\alpha p_3^\beta q^\gamma s_b^\delta\right ) \nonumber\\ \quad \label{eq : ohla}\end{aligned}\ ] ] finally , working in the center of mass frame and taking the nonrelativistic limit , we find @xmath152 \chi_f^{b\dagger}\chi_i^b \nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-5pt}&\bigg[g^2   \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\frac{12m_a^3 \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 45 m_a^2
m_b \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 56 m_a m_b^2   \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 24 m_b^3}{2(m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } m_b ) }   \hspace*{1pt } s - \frac{87 m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 128 m_b}{10 }   \hspace*{1pt }
l\right)\nonumber\\ & & + \frac{g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 ( 3 m_a + 4 m_b)}{(m_a + m_b ) } \left(- i \frac{2 \pi l}{p_0 q^2 } + \frac{s}{p_0 ^
2 } \right)\bigg ] { i\over m_b}\vec{s}_b\cdot\vec{p}\times\vec{q}\label{eq : yo}\end{aligned}\ ] ] we note from eq .
( [ eq : yo ] ) that the scattering amplitude consists of two pieces  a spin - independent component proportional to @xmath153 whose functional form @xmath154 is _ identical _ to that of spinless scattering  together with a spin - orbit component proportional to @xmath155 whose functional form is @xmath156 we note in eq .
( [ eq : im ] ) the presence in the spin - orbit potential of an imaginary final state rescattering term proportional to @xmath157 , similar to that found in the case of spin - independent scattering , together with a _ completely new _ type of kinematic form , proportional to @xmath158 which diverges at threshold .
the presence of _ either _ term would prevent us from writing down a well defined second order potential .
the solution to this problem is , as before , to properly subtract the iterated first order potential @xmath159 where we now use the one - graviton exchange potential @xmath160 given in eq .
( [ eq : oj ] ) . splitting this lowest order potential into spin - independent and spin - dependent components @xmath161 where @xmath162 we find that the iterated amplitude splits also into spin - independent and spin - dependent pieces .
the leading spin - independent amplitude is @xmath163 where we defined @xmath164 , and the leading spin - dependent term is @xmath165 ( in principle we would also have to iterate the leading order spin - orbit piece twice .
however this procedure yields only terms higher order in @xmath139 . )
we observe that when the amplitudes eqs .
( [ eq : iteration0hso ] ) and ( [ eq : iteration0hsi ] ) are subtracted from the full one loop scattering amplitude eq .
( [ eq : yo ] ) both the terms involving @xmath158 and those proportional to @xmath157 disappear leaving behind a well - defined second order potential @xmath166\nonumber\\ & = & \int{d^3q\over ( 2\pi)^3}e^{-i\vec{q}\cdot\vec{r } } \bigg[g^2 m_a m_b \left(- 6(m_a+m_b)s+{41\over 5}l\right ) \chi_f^{b\dagger}\chi_i^b\nonumber\\ & & { } \hspace*{63pt } + g^2 \bigg ( \hspace*{-2pt } - \frac{12m_a^3 + 45 m_a^2 m_b + 56 m_a m_b^2 + 24 m_b^3}{2(m_a + m_b ) }   \hspace*{1pt } s \nonumber\\ & & { } \hspace*{91pt } + \frac{87 m_a + 128 m_b}{10 }   \hspace*{1pt } l\bigg ) \hspace*{1pt } { i\over m_b}\vec{s}_b\cdot\vec{p}\times\vec{q } \hspace*{1pt } \bigg]\nonumber\\ & = & \left[-{3g^2m_am_b(m_a+m_b)\over r^2 } - { 41g^2m_am_b\hbar\over 10\pi r^3}\right ] \chi_f^{b\dagger}\chi_i^b\nonumber\\ & + & { 1\over m_b}\vec{s}_b\cdot \vec{p}\times\vec{\nabla}\bigg [ \frac{g^2(12m_a^3 + 45 m_a^2 m_b + 56 m_a m_b^2 + 24 m_b^3)}{4(m_a + m_b)r^2 } \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{66pt } + \frac{g^2(87 m_a + 128 m_b ) \hbar}{20 \pi r^3 } \bigg]\nonumber\\ & = & \left[-{3g^2m_am_b(m_a+m_b)\over r^2 } - { 41g^2m_am_b\hbar\over 10\pi r^3}\right ] \chi_f^{b\dagger}\chi_i^b\nonumber\\ & + & \bigg[{g^2(12 m_a^3 + 45 m_a^2 m_b + 56 m_a m_b^2 + 24 m_b^3)\over 2 m_b ( m_a+m_b)r^4 } \nonumber \\ & & + { 3 g^2(87 m_a+ 128m_b)\hbar\over 20 \pi m_b r^5}\bigg ] \vec{l}\cdot\vec{s}_b \label{eq : mn}\end{aligned}\ ] ] we observe then that the second order potential for long range gravitational scattering of a spinless and spin-1/2 particle consists of two components : one which is independent of the spin of particle b and is identical to the potential found for the case of spinless scattering , accompanied by a spin - orbit interaction involving a new form for its classical and quantum potentials .
it is tempting to speculate that the form of this new spin - orbit potential is also universal . in order to check this hypothesis
we consider the case of spin-0
spin-1 scattering .
the dynamics of a neutral spin-1 field @xmath167 having mass @xmath168 is described by the proca lagrangian which , when coupled to gravity via minimal substitution , takes the form @xmath169 \label{eqn : la}\ ] ] where @xmath170 is the spin-1 field tensor .
the last equality in eq .
( [ eq : fieldtens ] ) follows from the symmetry of the connection coefficients @xmath171 .
expanded in terms of the graviton field , the matter lagrangian then has the form @xmath172 and the one- and two - graviton vertices are        @xmath173 \nonumber \\ & + \hspace*{-7.5pt } & i \kappa \hspace*{1pt } i_{\mu \nu , \kappa \lambda } \bigg[(p_1 \cdot p_2 - m^2 ) { i_{\alpha \beta,}}^{\kappa \lambda } + \frac{1}{2 } \big(p_1^\kappa p_2^\lambda + p_1^\lambda p_2^\kappa\big ) \eta_{\alpha \beta } \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{39pt } - \big(p_1^\kappa p_{2 \alpha } \delta_\beta^\lambda + p_2^\kappa p_{1 \beta } \delta_\alpha^\lambda \big)\bigg ] \nonumber \\ { } ^1 \tau^{(2)}_{\beta,\alpha,\mu\nu , \rho \sigma}(p_2,p_1 , m)\hspace*{-7.5pt } & = \hspace*{-7.5pt } & { i \kappa^2 \over 2 } \hspace*{1pt } p_{\mu \nu , \rho \sigma } \big[(p_1 \cdot p_2 - m^2 ) \eta_{\alpha \beta } - p_{1 \beta } p_{2 \alpha } \big ] \nonumber \\ & - \hspace*{-7.5pt } & i \kappa^2 \hspace*{-2.6pt } \left ( \hspace*{-1.8pt } { i_{\mu \nu,}}^{\kappa \delta } { i_{\rho \sigma , \delta}}^{\lambda } \hspace*{-1.9pt } + \hspace*{-1.9pt } { i_{\rho \sigma,}}^{\kappa \delta } { i_{\mu \nu , \delta}}^{\lambda } \hspace*{-1pt } - \hspace*{-1pt } \frac{1}{2 } \big(\eta_{\mu \nu } { i_{\rho \sigma,}}^{\kappa \lambda } \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } \eta_{\rho \sigma } { i_{\mu \nu,}}^{\kappa \lambda}\big ) \ !
\hspace*{-1pt } \right ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{30pt } \times \bigg[(p_1 \cdot p_2 - m^2 ) { i_{\alpha \beta,}}^{\kappa \lambda }   + \frac{1}{2 } \big(p_1^\kappa p_2^\lambda + p_1^\lambda p_2^\kappa\big ) \eta_{\alpha \beta } \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{39pt } - \big(p_1^\kappa p_{2 \alpha } \delta_\beta^\lambda + p_2^\kappa p_{1 \beta } \delta_\alpha^\lambda \big)\bigg ] \nonumber \\ & - \hspace*{-7.5pt } & \frac{i \kappa^2 } { 2 } \hspace*{-1pt } \left({i_{\mu \nu,}}^{\eta \theta } { i_{\rho \sigma,}}^{\kappa \lambda } + { i_{\rho \sigma,}}^{\eta \theta } { i_{\mu \nu,}}^{\kappa \lambda }
\right ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{16pt } \times \hspace*{-0.5pt } \bigg[p_{1 \eta } \eta_{\alpha \kappa } ( p_{2 \theta } \eta_{\beta \lambda } \hspace*{-2.4pt } - \hspace*{-2pt } p_{2 \lambda } \eta_{\beta \theta}\hspace*{-1.3pt } ) \hspace*{-1.7pt } + \hspace*{-1.7pt } p_{2 \eta } \eta_{\beta \kappa } ( p_{1 \theta } \eta_{\alpha \lambda } \hspace*{-2.4pt } - \hspace*{-2pt } p_{1 \lambda } \eta_{\alpha \theta}\hspace*{-1.3pt } ) \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ] . \nonumber \\\end{aligned}\ ] ]    if we take the incoming spin-1 particle to have polarization vector @xmath174 satisfying @xmath175 and the outgoing particle to have polarization @xmath176 satisfying @xmath177 , then the one - graviton exchange amplitude can then be written as @xmath178\nonumber \\ & \simeq & - \frac{4 \pi g m_a m_b}{q^2}\bigg [ - \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot\epsilon_i^b - \frac{2}{m_a m_b } \left(\epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q\epsilon_i^b\cdot p_1-\epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot p_1\epsilon_i^b\cdot q \right ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{72pt } + \hspace*{0.5pt } \frac{1}{m_b^2 } \hspace*{1pt } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q\epsilon_i^b\cdot q \bigg ] \quad\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the first expression is exact while the second expression contains only the nonanalytic part in the threshold limit @xmath179 . now we rewrite this expression using the identity @xmath180\label{eq : kj}\ ] ] where we have defined the spin vector @xmath181 the leading one - graviton exchange amplitude can then be written as @xmath182\ ] ] in the nonrelativistic limit we have @xmath183 so that @xmath184 since @xmath185 eq . ( [ eq : ss ] ) becomes @xmath186 and the transition amplitude assumes the form @xmath187\end{aligned}\ ] ] the spin - independent and spin - orbit terms here are identical in form to those found in the spin-0  spin-1/2 case but now are accompanied by new terms which are quadrupole in nature , as can be seen from the identity @xmath188 the corresponding lowest order potential is then @xmath189 where we have defined @xmath190 and which agrees precisely with its spin-1/2 analog in eq .
( [ eq : oj ] ) up to quadrupole and tensor corrections .
the calculation of the one loop corrections proceeds as before , but with increased complexity due to the unit spin . evaluating the diagrams in fig .
[ fig_loops ] , we find then @xmath191 \nonumber\\ { } ^1{\cal m}^{(2)}_{\ref{fig_loops}b}(q ) \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt } & g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[(- 4 m_a s - 16 l ) \epsilon_f^{*b } \cdot \epsilon_i^b + \frac{8 m_a s + 16 l}{m_a^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1   \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \frac{8 l}{m_a m_b } ( \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 - \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b\cdot q ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \frac{4 m_a s + 8 l}{m_a^2 } ( \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 + \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b\cdot q ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \left(\left(2 m_a - \frac{3 m_b^2}{2 m_a}\right)s + \left(2 - \frac{2 m_b^2}{m_a^2}\right)l \right ) \frac{1}{m_b^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot q \bigg ] \nonumber\\ { } ^1{\cal m}^{(2)}_{\ref{fig_loops}c}(q ) \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt } & g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[(- 8 m_b s - 12 l ) \epsilon_f^{*b } \cdot \epsilon_i^b + \frac{16 l}{m_a^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1   \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \frac{4 m_b s + 8 l}{m_a m_b } ( \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 - \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b\cdot q ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \frac{8 l}{m_a^2 } ( \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 + \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b\cdot q ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \frac{m_b s + 8 l}{m_b^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot q \bigg ] \nonumber\\ { } ^1{\cal m}^{(2)}_{\ref{fig_loops}d}(q ) \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt } & g^2 m_a m_b \bigg [ \frac{4 m_a m_b } { q^2 } l \bigg ( \hspace*{-2.5pt } - \hspace*{-0.5pt } \epsilon_f^{*b } \hspace*{-1pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } \epsilon_i^b   \hspace*{-0.5pt } - \frac{2}{m_a m_b } ( \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-1pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } q \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-1pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } p_1 \hspace*{-1pt } - \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-1pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } p_1 \epsilon_i^b\cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } q ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{100pt } + \frac{1}{m_b^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot q\bigg ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + \frac{s}{s - s_0 } \bigg ( \hspace*{-2.5pt } -(3m_a + 4 m_b ) ( \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 - \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b\cdot q)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{88pt } + \frac{m_a ( 5 m_a + 7 m_b)}{2 m_b } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot q \bigg)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \bigg((6 m_a + 4 m_b ) s + \frac{12 m_a^2 - 6 m_a m_b + 24 m_b^2}{3 m_a m_b }
l \bigg ) \epsilon_f^{*b } \cdot \epsilon_i^b \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + \bigg(- 4 m_a s + \frac{22 m_a - 24 m_b}{3 m_b } l \bigg ) \frac{1}{m_a^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \bigg(13 ( m_a + m_b ) s + \frac{25 m_a^2 + 7
m_a m_b + 22 m_b^2}{3 m_a m_b } l \bigg ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{59pt } \times \frac{1}{m_a m_b } ( \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 - \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b\cdot q ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + \bigg(\hspace*{-1pt } 2 m_a s \hspace*{-1.5pt } - \hspace*{-0.8pt } \frac{11 m_a \hspace*{-1.9pt } - \hspace*{-1.4pt } 12 m_b}{3 m_b } l \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ) \frac{1}{m_a^2 } ( \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-1.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.8pt } q \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-1.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.8pt } p_1 \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-0.7pt } \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-1.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.8pt } p_1 \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-1.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.8pt } q)\nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + \bigg(\!\bigg ( \hspace*{-0.5pt } 7 m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 9 m_b \hspace*{-1pt } - \hspace*{-1pt } \frac{3 m_b^2}{4 m_a}\bigg)s \hspace*{-0.5pt }   + \hspace*{-0.5pt }   \bigg ( \hspace*{-0.5pt } 5 \frac{m_a}{m_b } \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 2 \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 9 \frac{m_b}{m_a } \hspace*{-1pt } - \hspace*{-1pt } \frac{m_b^2}{m_a^2}\bigg ) l\bigg ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{59pt } \times \frac{1}{m_b^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot q   \bigg ] \nonumber \\ & - \hspace*{-5pt } & i 4\pi g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 \hspace*{1pt } { l\over q^2}\sqrt{m_a m_b\over s - s_0 } \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ( \hspace*{-5pt } - \hspace*{-1.5pt } \epsilon_f^{*b } \hspace*{-2.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-1.5pt } \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-1.5pt } - \hspace*{-1.5pt } \frac{2}{m_a m_b } ( \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-2.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-1.5pt } q \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-2.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-1.5pt } p_1 \hspace*{-1.5pt } - \hspace*{-1pt } \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-2.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-1.5pt } p_1 \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-2.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-1.5pt } q ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{122pt } + \frac{1}{m_b^2 } \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-1pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } q \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-1pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } q \bigg ) \nonumber \\ { } ^1{\cal m}^{(2)}_{\ref{fig_loops}e}(q ) \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt } & g^2 m_a m_b \bigg [ \frac{4 m_a m_b } { q^2 } l \bigg ( \epsilon_f^{*b } \cdot \epsilon_i^b + \frac{2}{m_a m_b } ( \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 - \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b \cdot q ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{100pt } - \frac{1}{m_b^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot q\bigg ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + \bigg((2 m_a + 4 m_b ) s + \frac{12 m_a^2
+ 52 m_a m_b + 24 m_b^2}{3 m_a m_b } l \bigg ) \epsilon_f^{*b } \cdot \epsilon_i^b \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \bigg(4 m_a s + \frac{22 m_a + 24 m_b}{3 m_b } l \bigg ) \frac{1}{m_a^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + \bigg(\ ! \bigg(\frac{17}{4}m_a + 4 m_b\bigg ) s + \frac{25 m_a^2 + 49
m_a m_b + 22 m_b^2}{3 m_a m_b } l \bigg ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{59pt } \times \frac{1}{m_a m_b } ( \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 - \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b\cdot q ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + \bigg(\hspace*{-1pt } 2 m_a s \hspace*{-1.5pt } + \hspace*{-0.8pt } \frac{11 m_a \hspace*{-1.9pt } + \hspace*{-1.4pt } 12 m_b}{3 m_b } l \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ) \frac{1}{m_a^2 } ( \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-1.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.8pt } q \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-1.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.8pt } p_1 \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-0.7pt } \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-1.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.8pt } p_1 \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-1.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.8pt } q)\nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \bigg(\ !
\hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ( \hspace*{-0.8pt } \frac{13}{8 } m_a \hspace*{-2.5pt } + \hspace*{-2pt } \frac{31}{8 } m_b \hspace*{-2pt } + \hspace*{-2pt } \frac{3 m_b^2}{4 m_a } \hspace*{-0.8pt}\bigg ) \hspace*{-0.8pt}s \hspace*{-2.2pt } + \hspace*{-2.5pt }   \bigg ( \hspace*{-2pt } 5 \frac{m_a}{m_b } \hspace*{-2pt } + \hspace*{-2pt } \frac{16}{3 } \hspace*{-2pt } + \hspace*{-2pt } 9 \frac{m_b}{m_a } \hspace*{-2pt } + \hspace*{-2pt } \frac{m_b^2}{m_a^2 } \hspace*{-0.5pt}\bigg ) \hspace*{-0.5pt}l \hspace*{-1.5pt}\bigg ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{59pt } \times \frac{1}{m_b^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot q   \bigg ] \nonumber \\ { } ^1{\cal m}^{(2)}_{\ref{fig_loops}f}(q ) \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt } & g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[(2(m_a + m_b ) s - 14 l ) \epsilon_f^{*b } \cdot \epsilon_i^b \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + \bigg(\!\bigg(\frac{1}{2 } m_a \hspace*{-2pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 2 m_b\hspace*{-2pt}\bigg )   s \hspace*{-1.5pt}-\hspace*{-1.5pt } 4 l \hspace*{-2pt}\bigg ) \frac{1}{m_a m_b } ( \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-2pt } \cdot \hspace*{-1pt } q \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-1pt } \cdot \hspace*{-1pt } p_1 \hspace*{-1.5pt } - \hspace*{-1pt } \epsilon_f^{b * } \hspace*{-2pt } \cdot \hspace*{-1pt }
p_1 \epsilon_i^b \hspace*{-1pt}\cdot \hspace*{-1pt } q ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } + \bigg ( \ ! \bigg ( \hspace*{-1.5pt } - \frac{1}{4 } m_a + \frac{1}{2 } m_b \bigg )
s + 4 l \bigg ) \frac{1}{m_b^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot q \bigg ] \nonumber\\ { } ^1{\cal m}^{(2)}_{\ref{fig_loops}g}(q ) \hspace*{-5pt } & = \hspace*{-5pt } & g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[\frac{43 l}{15 } \epsilon_f^{*b } \cdot \epsilon_i^b + \frac{14 l}{5 m_a m_b } ( \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot p_1 - \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot p_1 \epsilon_i^b \cdot q ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{41pt } - \frac{7 l}{5 m_b^2 } \epsilon_f^{b*}\cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot q \bigg]\end{aligned}\ ] ] combining , we find the full one loop amplitude @xmath192\end{aligned}\ ] ] which , using the identity eq .
( [ eq : kj ] ) , becomes @xmath193\nonumber\\ & - \hspace*{-5pt } & i 4\pi g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 \hspace*{1pt } { l\over q^2}\sqrt{m_a m_b\over s - s_0 } \bigg ( \hspace*{-3pt } - \epsilon_f^{*b } \cdot \epsilon_i^b + \frac{2i}{m_a m_b }   \hspace*{1pt } \epsilon_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}\hspace*{1pt } p_1^\alpha p_3^\beta q^\gamma s_b^\delta \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{125pt } - \hspace*{0.5pt } \frac{1}{m_b^2 } \hspace*{1pt } \epsilon_f^{b * } \cdot q \epsilon_i^b \cdot q \bigg ) \label{eq : m2spin1kir}\end{aligned}\ ] ] notice here that without the @xmath194 terms , eq .
( [ eq : m2spin1kir ] ) has an identical structure to that of the case of spin-0
spin-1/2 scattering  eq . ( [ eq : ohla])provided we substitute @xmath195 .    finally ,
taking the nonrelativistic limit we find @xmath196 \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{15pt } \times \left(\hat{\epsilon}_f^{b * } \cdot \hat{\epsilon}_i^b - { 1\over m_b^2}\ , \vec p \hspace*{-0.5pt } : \hspace*{-1pt } t^b \hspace*{-2pt } : \hspace*{-1pt}\vec p\right ) \nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-6pt}&\bigg[g^2   \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\frac{12m_a^3 \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 45 m_a^2 m_b \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 56 m_a m_b^2   \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 24 m_b^3}{2(m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } m_b ) }   \hspace*{1pt } s - \frac{87 m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 128 m_b}{10 }   \hspace*{1pt } l\right)\nonumber\\ & & + \frac{g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 ( 3 m_a + 4 m_b)}{(m_a + m_b ) } \left(- i \frac{2 \pi l}{p_0 q^2 } + \frac{s}{p_0 ^ 2 } \right)\bigg ] { i\over m_b}\vec{s}_b\cdot\vec{p}\times\vec{q } \nonumber \\ & + \hspace*{-6pt}&\bigg[g^2 m_a m_b \left(- \frac{21 m_a^2 + 47 m_a m_b + 28 m_b^2}{4 ( m_a + m_b ) } \
, s + \frac{241}{60 } \hspace*{1pt } l \right ) \nonumber \\ & & + \frac{g^2 m_a^3 m_b^3}{2(m_a + m_b ) } \left(i \frac{6 \pi l}{p_0 q^2 } - \frac{s}{p_0 ^ 2}\right ) \bigg ] \frac{1}{m_b^2 } \ , \vec q : t^b : \vec q \label{eq : yo2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] as found in the earlier calculations , there exist terms involving both @xmath157 and @xmath158 which prevent the defining of a simple second order potential .
the solution now is well known
subtraction of the iterated first order potential .
since the form of the spin - independent@xmath197and spin - orbit@xmath198terms is identical to that found for the case of spin-1/2 , it is clear that the subtraction goes through as before and that the corresponding pieces of the second order potential have the _ same _ form as found for spin-1/2 .
in addition , there are now two new pieces of the amplitude , the quadrupole structure @xmath199 which multiplies terms involving both @xmath157 and @xmath158 and the tensor structure @xmath200 multiplying only @xmath157 . in order to remove these
we must iterate the full first order potential including these quadrupole and tensor components .
however , we find that our simple nonrelativistic iteration fails to remove them !
we suspect the reason to be the presence of the tensor structure @xmath200 in the lowest order potential which is in some sense a relativistic correction but which when iterated yields also quadrupole pieces @xmath199 .
a fully relativistic iteration should thus be performed which is under study but is beyond the scope of this paper .
it would be interesting to investigate if the requirement of canceling all @xmath157 and @xmath158 forms in the quadrupole and tensor pieces could clarify the ambiguity in the iteration of the leading order potential as discussed in @xcite .    since we did not perform the proper iteration of the quadrupole and tensor pieces
we include only the spin independent and spin - orbit pieces in the resulting second order potential @xmath201\nonumber\\ & = & \left[-{3g^2m_am_b(m_a+m_b)\over r^2 } - { 41g^2m_am_b\hbar\over 10\pi r^3}\right ] \hat{\epsilon}_f^{b * } \cdot \hat{\epsilon}_i^b \nonumber\\ & + & { 1\over m_b}\vec{s}_b\cdot \vec{p}\times\vec{\nabla}\bigg [ \frac{g^2(12m_a^3 + 45 m_a^2 m_b + 56 m_a m_b^2 + 24 m_b^3)}{4(m_a + m_b)r^2 } \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{66pt } + \frac{g^2(87 m_a + 128 m_b ) \hbar}{20 \pi r^3 } \bigg ] + { } ^{1}v^{(2)}_t(\vec r ) \nonumber\\ & = & \left[-{3g^2m_am_b(m_a+m_b)\over r^2 } - { 41g^2m_am_b\hbar\over 10\pi r^3}\right ] \hat{\epsilon}_f^{b * } \cdot \hat{\epsilon}_i^b \nonumber\\ & + & \bigg[{g^2(12 m_a^3 + 45 m_a^2 m_b + 56 m_a m_b^2 + 24 m_b^3)\over 2 m_b ( m_a+m_b)r^4 } \nonumber \\ & & + { 3 g^2(87 m_a+ 128m_b)\hbar\over 20 \pi m_b r^5}\bigg ] \vec{l}\cdot\vec{s}_b + { } ^{1}v^{(2)}_t(\vec r ) \label{eq : nlopot01}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath202 denotes the tensor pieces not explicitly shown .
comparison with the corresponding form of @xmath203 given in eq .
( [ eq : mn ] ) confirms the universality which we have suggested  the spin - independent and spin - orbit terms have identical forms .
the next task is to see whether this universality applies when both scattered particles carry spin .
for this purpose we consider the case of spin-1/2
spin-1/2 scattering .
in the case of scattering of a pair of spin-1/2 particles , the basic vertices have already been developed in the spin-0
spin-1/2 scattering section , so we can proceed directly to our calculation .
the one - graviton exchange amplitude at tree level reads @xmath204
\times \sqrt{m_a^2m_b^2\over e_1e_2e_3e_4 } \quad \quad\label{eq : kh}\end{aligned}\ ] ] and with the spin identities eq .
( [ eq : id ] ) for system @xmath19 and @xmath205\label{eq : ida}\ ] ] for system @xmath16 , eq .
( [ eq : kh ] ) can be written as @xmath206.\end{aligned}\ ] ] in the symmetric center of mass frame we take the nonrelativistic limit yielding @xmath207 \label{eq : lomnonrelhh_gr}\end{aligned}\ ] ] whereby the lowest order potential for spin-1/2
spin-1/2 scattering becomes @xmath208 note that since the piece proportional to @xmath209 in eq .
( [ eq : lomnonrelhh_gr ] ) is analytic in @xmath210 it yields only a short distance contribution which is omitted in the potential eq .
( [ eq : mj ] ) .    in this case when we evaluate the loop diagrams in fig .
[ fig_loops ] , we notice that part of the spin - spin structure piece contains the form @xmath211 multiplying the nonanalytic structures @xmath81 and @xmath82 . due to the extra factor of @xmath67 in this form , we must expand all loop integrals to _ one order higher _ in @xmath67 than before in order to be consistent .
this has been done and does make a difference in our results for the spin - spin interaction piece .
the results for the individual diagrams are then found to be @xmath212\nonumber\\ { } ^{{1\over 2}{1\over 2}}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}b}^{(2)}(q)\hspace*{-5pt}&=&\hspace*{-5pt } g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal u}_b \left(15 l + 7 m_a s\right ) \nonumber\\   & & \hspace*{37pt } +   i \frac{{\mathcal e}_a { \mathcal u}_b}{m_a^2 m_b } \left(\frac{21}{2 } l + 4 m_a s\right )   +   i \frac{{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal e}_b}{m_a m_b^2 }
\left(13 l + 8 m_a s\right ) \nonumber \\   & & \hspace*{37pt } + \frac{s_a\cdot qs_b\cdot q}{m_a m_b } \left(\frac{17}{3 } l + \frac{5}{2 } m_a s\right ) \nonumber\\   & & \hspace*{37pt } - \frac{q^2 s_a \cdot s_b}{m_a m_b } \left(\frac{11}{3 } l + \frac{3}{2 } m_a s\right ) \hspace*{-1.5pt}\bigg]\nonumber\\ { } ^{{1\over 2}{1\over 2}}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}c}^{(2)}(q)\hspace*{-5pt}&=&\hspace*{-5pt } g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal u}_b \left(15 l + 7 m_b s\right )
\nonumber\\   & & \hspace*{37pt } +   i \frac{{\mathcal e}_a { \mathcal u}_b}{m_a^2 m_b } \left(13 l + 8 m_b s\right )   +   i \frac{{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal e}_b}{m_a m_b^2 } \left(\frac{21}{2 } l + 4 m_b s\right ) \nonumber \\   & & \hspace*{37pt } + \frac{s_a\cdot qs_b\cdot q}{m_a m_b } \left(\frac{17}{3 } l + \frac{5}{2 } m_b s\right ) \nonumber\\   & & \hspace*{37pt } - \frac{q^2 s_a \cdot s_b}{m_a m_b } \left(\frac{11}{3 } l + \frac{3}{2 } m_b s\right ) \hspace*{-1.5pt}\bigg]\nonumber\\ { } ^{{1\over 2}{1\over 2}}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}d}^{(2)}(q)\hspace*{-5pt}&=&\hspace*{-5pt } g^2 m_am_b \bigg[{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal u}_b \hspace*{-1.5pt}\bigg(\hspace*{-1.5pt}l \hspace*{-1pt}\left(\hspace*{-1.5pt } { 4m_am_b\over q^2}\hspace*{-1pt}+\hspace*{-1pt}\frac{31 m_a^2\hspace*{-1pt } - \hspace*{-1pt}16 m_a m_b\hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 31 m_b^2}{4m_am_b}\hspace*{-0.5pt}\right ) \nonumber \\   & & \hspace*{68pt } + s \hspace*{2pt } { 9\over 2}(m_a + m_b)\hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{37pt}+   i \frac{{\mathcal e}_a { \mathcal u}_b}{m_a^2 m_b}\bigg(\hspace*{-1pt } l \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\hspace*{-1pt } \frac{8 m_a m_b}{q^2 } \hspace*{-1pt }    + \hspace*{-1pt } \frac{124 m_a^2 - 11 m_a m_b + 177 m_b^2}{12 m_a m_b}\right ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{82pt } + s \hspace*{-1pt } \left ( \hspace*{-1pt } \frac{m_a m_b(4m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-0.5pt } 3 m_b)}{s - s_0 } \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } ( 13 m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-0.5pt } 9 m_b ) \hspace*{-1pt}\right ) \ ! \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{37pt}+   i \frac{{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal e}_b}{m_a m_b^2}\bigg(\hspace*{-1pt } l \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\hspace*{-1pt } \frac{8 m_a m_b}{q^2}\hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } \frac{177 m_a^2 - 11 m_a m_b + 124 m_b^2}{12 m_a m_b}\right ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{82pt } + s \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\hspace*{-1pt } \frac{m_a m_b(3 m_a \hspace*{-1pt } \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-0.5pt } 4 m_b)}{s - s_0 } \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } ( 9 m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-0.5pt } 13 m_b ) \hspace*{-1pt}\right ) \ !
\hspace*{-1pt } \bigg)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{37pt } + \frac{s_a\cdot qs_b\cdot q}{m_a m_b } \bigg ( \hspace*{-1pt } l \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\frac{4 m_a m_b}{q^2 } + \frac{39 m_a^2 \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 25 m_a m_b \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 39 m_b^2}{6 m_a m_b } \right ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{99pt } + s \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\frac{m_a m_b ( m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } m_b)}{s - s_0 } \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } \frac{39}{4 } \left(m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } m_b \right ) \hspace*{-1pt } \right ) \hspace*{-3pt } \bigg ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{37pt } - \frac{q^2 s_a \cdot s_b}{m_a m_b } \bigg ( \hspace*{-1.5pt } l \hspace*{-2pt } \left(\hspace*{-1pt } \frac{2 m_a m_b}{q^2 } \hspace*{-1.5pt } + \hspace*{-1.5pt } \frac{153 m_a^2 \hspace*{-1.2pt } + \hspace*{-1.2pt } 218 m_a m_b \hspace*{-1.2pt } + \hspace*{-1.2pt } 153 m_b^2}{24 m_a m_b } \hspace*{-1pt}\right)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{92pt } + s \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\frac{m_a m_b ( m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } m_b)}{s - s_0 } \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } \frac{41}{4 } \left(m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } m_b \right ) \hspace*{-1pt } \right ) \hspace*{-3pt } \bigg ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{37pt } + \big(2 s_a \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } p_3 s_b \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } p_1 \hspace*{-0.5pt } + \hspace*{-0.5pt } s_a \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } q s_b \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } p_1 \hspace*{-0.5pt } - \hspace*{-0.5pt } s_a \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } p_3 s_b \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } q\big ) \frac{22 l}{3 m_a m_b}\bigg ] \nonumber\\ & - & i 4\pi g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 \hspace*{1pt } { l\over q^2}\sqrt{m_a m_b \over s - s_0 } \ ,
\bigg({\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal u}_b + 2 \hspace*{0.5pt } i \frac{{\mathcal e}_a { \mathcal u}_b}{m_a^2 m_b } + 2 \hspace*{0.5pt } i \frac{{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal e}_b}{m_a m_b^2}\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{123pt }   + \frac{s_a \cdot qs_b \cdot q - \frac{1}{2}q^2 s_a \cdot s_b}{m_a m_b}\bigg ) \nonumber\\ { } ^{{1\over 2}{1\over 2}}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}e}^{(2)}(q)\hspace*{-5pt}&=&\hspace*{-5pt } g^2 m_am_b \bigg[{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal u}_b   \hspace*{-1.5pt}\bigg(\hspace*{-1.5pt}l \hspace*{-1pt}\left(\hspace*{-1.5pt } - { 4m_am_b\over q^2 }   \hspace*{-1pt } - \hspace*{-1pt}\frac{93 m_a^2\hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt}232 m_a m_b\hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 93 m_b^2}{12 m_am_b}\hspace*{-0.5pt}\right ) \nonumber \\   & & \hspace*{68pt } + s \left(- { 7\over 2}(m_a + m_b ) \right)\hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{37pt}+   i \frac{{\mathcal e}_a { \mathcal u}_b}{m_a^2 m_b}\bigg(\hspace*{-1pt } l \hspace*{-1.5pt } \left(\hspace*{-1.5pt } - \frac{8 m_a m_b}{q^2 } \hspace*{-1.5pt }    - \hspace*{-1.5pt } \frac{124 m_a^2 \hspace*{-1.5pt } + \hspace*{-1.5pt } 235 m_a m_b \hspace*{-1.5pt } + \hspace*{-1.5pt } 177 m_b^2}{12 m_a m_b } \hspace*{-1.4pt } \right ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{82pt } + s \hspace*{-1pt } \left (   - 4 m_a - \frac{33}{4 } m_b \right ) \ !
\hspace*{-1pt } \bigg)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{37pt}+   i \frac{{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal e}_b}{m_a m_b^2}\bigg(\hspace*{-1pt } l \hspace*{-1.5pt } \left(\hspace*{-1.5pt } - \frac{8 m_a m_b}{q^2 } \hspace*{-1.5pt }    - \hspace*{-1.5pt } \frac{177 m_a^2 \hspace*{-1.5pt } + \hspace*{-1.5pt } 235 m_a m_b \hspace*{-1.5pt } + \hspace*{-1.5pt } 124 m_b^2}{12 m_a m_b } \hspace*{-1.4pt } \right ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{82pt } + s \hspace*{-1pt } \left ( - \frac{33}{4 } m_a - 4 m_b \right ) \ !
\hspace*{-1pt } \bigg)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{37pt } + \frac{s_a\cdot qs_b\cdot q}{m_a m_b } \bigg ( \hspace*{-1pt } l \hspace*{-1.5pt } \left(\hspace*{-1.5pt } - \frac{4 m_a m_b}{q^2 } \hspace*{-1.5pt }    - \hspace*{-1.5pt }   \frac{39 m_a^2 \hspace*{-1.7pt } + \hspace*{-1.5pt } 23 m_a m_b \hspace*{-1.7pt } + \hspace*{-1.5pt } 39 m_b^2}{6 m_a m_b } \hspace*{-1.4pt } \right ) \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{99pt } + s \hspace*{-1pt } \left ( \frac{39}{4 } \left(m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } m_b \right ) \hspace*{-1pt }
\right ) \hspace*{-3pt } \bigg ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{37pt } - \frac{q^2 s_a \hspace*{-1.7pt } \cdot \hspace*{-1.6pt } s_b}{m_a m_b } \hspace*{-1pt } \bigg ( \hspace*{-2pt } l \hspace*{-2pt } \left(\hspace*{-2.3pt } - \frac{2 m_a m_b}{q^2 } \hspace*{-1.5pt }    - \hspace*{-1.5pt } \frac{153 m_a^2 \hspace*{-1.8pt } + \hspace*{-2.2pt } 158 m_a m_b \hspace*{-1.8pt } + \hspace*{-2.2pt } 153 m_b^2}{24 m_a m_b } \hspace*{-1.4pt}\right)\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{87pt } + s \left ( - \frac{3}{2 } \left(m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } m_b \right ) \hspace*{-1pt } \right ) \hspace*{-3pt } \bigg ) \nonumber \\ & & \hspace*{37pt } + \big(2 s_a \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } p_3 s_b \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } p_1 \hspace*{-0.5pt } + \hspace*{-0.5pt } s_a \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } q s_b \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } p_1 \hspace*{-0.5pt } - \hspace*{-0.5pt } s_a \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } p_3 s_b \hspace*{-0.5pt } \cdot \hspace*{-0.5pt } q\big ) \frac{- 22 l}{3 m_a m_b}\bigg ] \nonumber\\ { } ^{{1\over 2}{1\over 2}}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}f}^{(2)}(q)\hspace*{-5pt}&=&\hspace*{-5pt } g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal u}_b \big(14
l - 2 ( m_a + m_b ) s\big ) \nonumber\\   & & \hspace*{37pt } +   i \frac{{\mathcal e}_a { \mathcal u}_b}{m_a^2 m_b } \bigg(4 l + \left(- 2 m_a - \frac{1}{2 } m_b \right ) \
! s \bigg ) \nonumber \\   & & \hspace*{37pt } +   i \frac{{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal e}_b}{m_a m_b^2 } \bigg(4 l + \left(- \frac{1}{2 } m_a - 2 m_b \right ) \ ! s \bigg ) \nonumber \\   & & \hspace*{37pt } + \frac{s_a\cdot qs_b\cdot q}{m_a m_b } \left(- 2 l - ( m_a + m_b ) s\right ) \nonumber\\   & & \hspace*{37pt } - \frac{q^2 s_a \cdot s_b}{m_a m_b } \left(- 2
l - ( m_a + m_b ) s\right ) \hspace*{-1.5pt}\bigg]\nonumber\\ { } ^{{1\over 2}{1\over 2}}{\cal m}_{\ref{fig_loops}g}^{(2)}(q)\hspace*{-5pt}&=&\hspace*{-5pt}g^2 m_a m_b \bigg[{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal u}_b   \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\hspace*{-1pt } - \frac{43}{15}l \hspace*{-0.5pt } \right ) \hspace*{-2pt }   +   i \frac{{\mathcal e}_a { \mathcal u}_b}{m_a^2 m_b } \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\hspace*{-1pt } - \frac{14}{5 } l \hspace*{-0.5pt } \right ) \hspace*{-2pt }   +   i \frac{{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal e}_b}{m_a m_b^2 } \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\hspace*{-1pt } - \frac{14}{5 } l \hspace*{-0.5pt } \right ) \nonumber \\   & & \hspace*{37pt}+ \frac{s_a\cdot qs_b\cdot q}{m_a m_b } \left(- \frac{7}{5 } l\right )   - \frac{q^2 s_a \cdot s_b}{m_a m_b } \left(- \frac{7}{5 } l\right ) \hspace*{-1.5pt}\bigg].\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have defined @xmath213 and @xmath214 with @xmath215 to keep our notation compact .
the sum of all diagrams is found to be @xmath216\nonumber\\ & - \hspace*{-7.5pt } & i 4\pi g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 { l\over q^2}\sqrt{m_a m_b \over s - s_0 } \
, \bigg({\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal u}_b + 2 i
\frac{{\mathcal e}_a { \mathcal u}_b}{m_a^2 m_b } + 2 i \frac{{\mathcal u}_a { \mathcal e}_b}{m_a m_b^2}\nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{124pt }   + \frac{s_a \cdot qs_b \cdot q - \frac{1}{2}q^2 s_a \cdot s_b}{m_a m_b}\bigg ) .
\quad \label{eq : ohla2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] comparing with our finding for spin-0
spin-1/2 scattering in eq .
( [ eq : ohla ] ) , we notice the by now familiar universality of the amplitude : the form of the component proportional to @xmath217 of eq .
( [ eq : ohla ] ) is found here in the component proportional to @xmath218 , and the form of the structure proportional to @xmath219 of eq .
( [ eq : ohla ] ) is now found in the component proportional to @xmath220 in eq .
( [ eq : ohla2 ] ) .
moreover , the amplitude is symmetric in @xmath221 and new gravitational spin - spin interaction corrections arise .
the quantum part of the spin - spin component has been calculated previously by kirilin @xcite whose result disagrees with our result for the numerical prefactors . for the quantum terms in the spin - orbit components however , we fully agree with kirilin s results in @xcite . in the nonrelativistic limit
we obtain the expression @xmath222 \hspace*{-1.8pt } \chi_f^{a\dagger}\chi_i^a \hspace*{1.3pt }   \chi_f^{b\dagger}\chi_i^b \nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-7.5pt}&\bigg[\hspace*{-0.8pt } g^2   \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\frac{24m_a^3 \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 56 m_a^2 m_b \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 45 m_a m_b^2   \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 12 m_b^3}{2(m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } m_b ) }   \hspace*{1pt } s - \frac{128 m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 87 m_b}{10 }   \hspace*{1pt } l\right)\nonumber\\ & & + \frac{g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 ( 4 m_a + 3 m_b)}{(m_a + m_b ) } \left(- i \frac{2 \pi l}{p_0 q^2 } + \frac{s}{p_0 ^ 2 } \right)\bigg ] { i\over m_a}\vec{s}_a\cdot\vec{p}\times\vec{q } \ , \chi_f^{b\dagger}\chi_i^b \nonumber \\ & + \hspace*{-7.5pt}&\bigg[\hspace*{-0.8pt } g^2   \hspace*{-1pt } \left(\frac{12m_a^3 \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 45 m_a^2 m_b \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 56 m_a m_b^2   \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 24 m_b^3}{2(m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } m_b ) }   \hspace*{1pt } s - \frac{87 m_a \hspace*{-1pt } + \hspace*{-1pt } 128 m_b}{10 }   \hspace*{1pt } l\right)\nonumber\\ & & + \frac{g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 ( 3 m_a + 4 m_b)}{(m_a + m_b ) } \left(- i \frac{2 \pi l}{p_0 q^2 } + \frac{s}{p_0 ^ 2 } \right)\bigg ] \chi_f^{a\dagger}\chi_i^a \ , { i\over m_b}\vec{s}_b\cdot\vec{p}\times\vec{q } \nonumber \\ & + \hspace*{-7.5pt } & g^2 m_a m_b \ , \frac{19 m_a^2 + 36 m_a m_b + 19 m_b^2}{2(m_a + m_b)}\ , s \ , \frac{\vec s_a \cdot \vec q \ , \vec s_b \cdot \vec q - \vec q^{\hspace*{1.4pt}2 } \vec s_a \cdot \vec s_b}{m_a m_b}\nonumber\\ & -\hspace*{-7.5pt } & g^2 m_a m_b \ ,
l \ , \frac{11 \vec s_a \cdot \vec q \ , \vec s_b \cdot \vec q - 16 \hspace*{1pt } \vec q^{\hspace*{1.4pt}2 } \vec s_a \cdot \vec s_b}{15 m_a m_b}\nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-7.5pt } & \frac{g^2 m_a^3 m_b^3}{m_a + m_b } \ , \frac{s}{p_0 ^ 2 } \ ,   \frac{\vec s_a \cdot \vec q \ , \vec s_b \cdot \vec q - \vec q^{\hspace*{1.4pt}2 } \vec s_a \cdot \vec s_b}{m_a m_b}\nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-7.5pt } & \frac{g^2 m_a^3 m_b^3}{m_a + m_b } \left(-i \frac{4 \pi l}{p_0 q^2}\right ) \frac{\vec s_a \cdot \vec q \ , \vec s_b \cdot \vec q - \frac{1}{2}\vec q^{\hspace*{1.4pt}2 } \vec s_a \cdot \vec s_b}{m_a m_b }   \label{eq : yohh}\end{aligned}\ ] ] which obviously has to exhibit the universalities of the spin - independent and the spin - orbit pieces .
therefore , we know that the subtraction of the second born iteration successfully removes the unwanted @xmath157 and @xmath158 structures for the spin - independent and the spin - orbit components .
the leading spin - spin term of the second born iteration amplitude is new , however , and we compute @xmath223\nonumber\\ & = \hspace*{-10pt } & \frac{g^2m_a^2m_b^2}{m_a + m_b } \ ,
\frac{s}{p_0 ^ 2 } \ , ( \vec s_a \cdot \vec q \ , \vec s_b \cdot \vec q - \vec q^{\hspace*{1.4pt}2 } \vec s_a \cdot \vec s_b)\nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-10pt } & \frac{g^2m_a^2m_b^2}{m_a + m_b } \left(-i \frac{4 \pi l}{p_0 q^2}\right ) ( \vec s_a \cdot \vec q \ , \vec s_b \cdot \vec q - \frac{1}{2}\vec q^{\hspace*{1.4pt}2 } \vec s_a \cdot \vec s_b).\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we again defined @xmath164 . with this
, the full second born iteration amplitude becomes @xmath224 and we observe that when this amplitude is subtracted from the full one loop scattering amplitude eq .
( [ eq : yohh ] ) , _ all _ terms involving @xmath158 and @xmath157 disappear leaving behind a well - defined second order potential @xmath225\nonumber\\ & \simeq \hspace*{-5pt } & \left[-{3g^2m_am_b(m_a+m_b)\over r^2 } - { 41g^2m_am_b\hbar\over 10\pi r^3}\right ] \chi_f^{a\dagger}\chi_i^a \ , \chi_f^{b\dagger}\chi_i^b \nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-5pt } & { 1\over m_a}\vec{s}_a\cdot \vec{p}\times\vec{\nabla}\bigg [ \frac{g^2(24m_a^3 + 56 m_a^2 m_b + 45 m_a m_b^2 + 12 m_b^3)}{4(m_a + m_b)r^2 } \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{68pt } + \frac{g^2(128 m_a + 87 m_b ) \hbar}{20 \pi r^3 } \bigg ] \chi_f^{a\dagger}\chi_i^a \nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-5pt } & \chi_f^{a\dagger}\chi_i^a \ , { 1\over m_b}\vec{s}_b\cdot \vec{p}\times\vec{\nabla}\bigg [ \frac{g^2(12m_a^3 + 45 m_a^2 m_b + 56 m_a m_b^2 + 24 m_b^3)}{4(m_a + m_b)r^2 } \nonumber\\ & & \hspace*{97pt } + \frac{g^2(87 m_a + 128 m_b ) \hbar}{20
\pi r^3 } \bigg]\nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-5pt } & \frac{\vec s_a \cdot \vec{\nabla } \vec s_b \cdot \vec{\nabla } - \vec{\nabla}^2 \vec s_a \cdot \vec s_b}{m_a m_b } \left[\frac{g^2 m_a m_b(19 m_a^2 + 36 m_a m_b + 19 m_b^2)}{4(m_a + m_b)r^2}\right]\nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-5pt } & \frac{11 \vec s_a \cdot \vec{\nabla } \vec s_b \cdot \vec{\nabla } - 16 \vec{\nabla}^2 \vec s_a \cdot \vec s_b}{15 m_a m_b } \left[\frac{g^2 m_a m_b \hbar}{2 \pi r^3}\right]\nonumber\\ & \simeq \hspace*{-5pt } & \left[-{3g^2m_am_b(m_a+m_b)\over r^2 } - { 41g^2m_am_b\hbar\over 10\pi r^3}\right ] \chi_f^{a\dagger}\chi_i^a \ , \chi_f^{b\dagger}\chi_i^b\nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-5pt } & \bigg[{g^2(24 m_a^3 + 56 m_a^2 m_b + 45 m_a m_b^2 + 12 m_b^3)\over 2 m_a ( m_a+m_b)r^4 } \nonumber \\ & & + { 3 g^2(128 m_a + 87 m_b)\hbar\over 20 \pi m_a r^5}\bigg ]   \vec{l}\cdot\vec{s}_a \ , \chi_f^{b\dagger}\chi_i^b   \nonumber \\ & + \hspace*{-5pt } & \bigg[{g^2(12 m_a^3 + 45 m_a^2 m_b + 56 m_a m_b^2 + 24 m_b^3)\over 2 m_b ( m_a+m_b)r^4 } \nonumber \\ & & + { 3 g^2(87 m_a+ 128m_b)\hbar\over 20 \pi m_b r^5}\bigg ]   \chi_f^{a\dagger}\chi_i^a \ , \vec{l}\cdot\vec{s}_b \nonumber \\ & + \hspace*{-5pt } & \left[\frac{2 g^2(19 m_a^2 + 36 m_a m_b + 19 m_b^2)}{(m_a + m_b ) r^4}\right ] \ ! \left(\vec
s_a \cdot \vec r \ , \vec s_b \cdot \vec r \
, / r^2 - \frac{1}{2 } \hspace*{1pt } \vec s_a \cdot \vec s_b\right)\nonumber\\ & + \hspace*{-5pt } & \frac{11 g^2 \hbar}{2 \pi r^5 } \left(\vec s_a \cdot \vec r \ , \vec s_b \cdot \vec r \ , / r^2 - \frac{43}{55 } \vec s_a \cdot \vec s_b\right)\end{aligned}\ ] ] which besides the universal spin - independent and spin - orbit components displays a new ( and presumably universal ) gravitational spin - spin interaction .
above we have analyzed the gravitational scattering of two particles having nonzero mass . in lowest order
the interaction arises from one - graviton exchange and leads at threshold to the well known newtonian interaction @xmath226 .
inclusion of two - graviton exchange effects means adding the contribution from box , cross - box , triangle , and bubble diagrams , which have a rather complex form .
the calculation can be simplified , however , by using ideas from effective field theory .
the point is that if one is interested only in the leading long - range behavior of the interaction , then one need retain only the leading nonanalytic small momentum - transfer piece of the scattering amplitude .
specifically , the terms which one retains are those which are nonanalytic and behave as either @xmath68 or @xmath70 .
when fourier transformed , the former leads to classical ( @xmath69-independent ) terms in the potential of order @xmath227 while the latter generates quantum mechanical ( @xmath69-dependent ) corrections of order @xmath228 .
( of course , there are also shorter range nonanalytic contributions than these that are generated by scattering terms of order @xmath229 or @xmath230 . however , these pieces are higher order in momentum transfer and thus lead to shorter distance effects than those considered above and are therefore neglected in our discussion . )
specific calculations were done for particles with spin @xmath231 , @xmath232 , @xmath233 , and @xmath234 and various universalities were found . in particular
, we found that in each case there was a spin - independent contribution of the form @xmath235 \nonumber \\ & & \times \left < s_a , m_{af}|s_a , m_{ai}\right >
\left < s_b , m_{bf}|s_b , m_{bi}\right>\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath236 and @xmath237 and with @xmath238 the spin of particle @xmath16 and @xmath239 the spin of particle @xmath19 with projections @xmath17 and @xmath20 on the quantization axis . the imaginary component of the amplitude , which would not , when fourier - transformed lead to a real potential , is eliminated when the iterated lowest order potential contribution is subtracted , leading to a well defined spin - independent second order potential of universal form @xmath240 \nonumber\\ & & \times \left
< s_a , m_{af}|s_a , m_{ai}\right > \left < s_b , m_{bf}|s_b , m_{bi}\right>\end{aligned}\ ] ] whose classical component depends on the way the iteration of the leading order potential is performed .
this ambiguity shows that the second order potential itself is not an observable , but we use it as a nice way to display the long distance components of the scattering amplitude in coordinate space .
if either scattering particle carries spin then there exists an additional spin - orbit contribution , whose form is also universal @xmath241 \times \vec{l}\cdot\vec{s}_a \left < s_b , m_{bf}|s_b , m_{bi}\right >   \nonumber \\ & + \hspace*{-5pt } & \bigg[{g^2(12 m_a^3 + 45 m_a^2 m_b + 56 m_a m_b^2 + 24 m_b^3)\over 2 m_b ( m_a+m_b)r^4 } \nonumber \\ & & + { 3 g^2(87 m_a+ 128m_b)\hbar\over 20 \pi m_b r^5}\bigg ] \times \left < s_a , m_{af}|s_a , m_{ai}\right > \vec{l}\cdot\vec{s}_b \quad \quad\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have defined @xmath242 in this case a well defined second order potential required the subtraction of infrared singular terms behaving as both @xmath157 _ and _ @xmath158 which arise from the iterated lowest order potential .    in the calculation of spin-0
spin-1 scattering we encountered new tensor structures including a quadrupole interaction .
unfortunately , the subtraction of the @xmath157 and @xmath158 tensor pieces in the two - graviton exchange amplitude was not successful with our simple nonrelativistic iteration of the leading order potential so that we can not at this time give the form of the quadrupole component of the potential .
further work is needed to clarify this issue .
the corrections to the spin - spin interaction have only been calculated in spin-1/2
spin-1/2 scattering where we found their contributions to the scattering amplitude and to the potential .
since we verified these forms only for a single spin configuration we have not confirmed its universality which we , however , strongly suspect .
of course , for higher spin configurations , there also exist quadrupole - quadrupole interactions , spin - quadrupole interactions , etc .
however , the calculation of such forms becomes increasingly cumbersome as the spin increases , and the phenomenological importance becomes smaller .
thus we end our calculations here .
one point of view to interpret the universalities of the long distance components of the scattering amplitudes and the resulting potentials is that if we increase the spins of our scattered particles , all we do is to add additional multipole moments .
the spin - independent component can then be viewed as a monopole - monopole interaction , the spin - orbit piece as a dipole - monopole interaction etc . as long as we do not change the quantum numbers that characterize the lower multipoles ,
an increase in spin of the scattered particles merely adds new interactions that are less important at long distances .
the same kind of universalities were also found in long distance effects in electromagnetic scattering @xcite and in the long range components of mixed electromagnetic - gravitational scattering @xcite .
* acknowledgements *    we would like to thank john donoghue for many clarifying discussions and walter goldberger for important comments .
this work was supported in part by the national science foundation under award phy05 - 53304 ( brh and ar ) and by the the us department of energy under grant de - fg-02 - 92er40704 ( ar ) .
in this appendix we give the integrals @xmath243 = i\int { d^3\ell\over ( 2\pi)^3 } { - 4\pi gm_am_b\over |\vec{\ell } - \vec{p}_f|^2+\lambda^2 } { i[1;\ell_r;\ell_r\ell_s]\over { p_0 ^ 2\over 2m_r}-{\ell^2\over 2m_r}+i\epsilon } { - 4\pi gm_am_b\over |\vec{p}_i - \vec{\ell}|^2+\lambda^2}\ ] ] which are needed in order to perform the iteration of the lowest order newton potentials . here
we list only the results ; for a more detailed derivation , albeit with a different prefactor , see @xcite .
the leading expressions for the iteration integrals read @xmath244
above we have argued that the scattering amplitude which is ultimately related to observables in quantum field theory is a physical result while the potential we have given is not an observable and depends both on the gauge , _
i.e. _ , the choice of coordinates used , and on the way we perform the iteration , _
i.e. _ , on the way we perform the matching . while the classical component of our potential is in fact plagued by these ambiguities ,
the quantum part is unique since it is unaffected by how we perform the matching and since a quantum field theory calculation in any gauge would result in the same result @xcite .    in this appendix
we will demonstrate how we can recover the classical equations of motion from our scattering amplitudes by setting up the einstein - infeld - hoffmann ( eih ) lagrangian @xcite .
the eih lagrangian is itself dependent on the choice of coordinates , but can be expressed in the center of mass frame ( @xmath245 , @xmath246 ) in a general way as @xcite @xmath247 where the kinetic energy to nlo in the nonrelativistic expansion reads @xmath248 and the potential is @xmath249 with @xmath250 \frac{\vec p^{\hspace*{1.4pt } 2}}{m_a m_b } \right .
\nonumber \\    & & \hspace*{69.5pt } \left.+ \left[\frac{1}{2 } + \alpha \ , \frac{(m_a + m_b)^2}{m_a m_b } \right ] \frac{\left(\vec p \cdot \hat r\right)^2}{m_a m_b}\right\ } \label{eq_eihv1 } \\
v^{(2 ) } & = & \left(1 - 2 \alpha\right ) \frac{g^2
m_a m_b ( m_a + m_b)}{2 r^2}. \label{eq_eihv2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the parameter @xmath251 parameterizes the choice of coordinates used , where @xmath252 was the gauge of the original eih result .
the coordinate change @xmath253 which implies @xmath254\ ] ] brings the original eih lagrangian into the form above , which is the most general result .    since we perform our matching on - shell , _
i.e. _ , we use the on - shell one - graviton exchange amplitude to define the leading order @xmath255 potential , terms proportional to @xmath256 would never arise .
clearly , our result must be in a gauge such that the coefficient of the structure @xmath257 in eq .
( [ eq_eihv1 ] ) vanishes .
that is the case if and only if the gauge parameter is @xmath258 whereby the eih potential becomes @xmath259 \frac{\vec p^{\hspace*{1.4pt } 2}}{m_a m_b } \right\ } \label{eq_eihhrv1 } \\
v^{(2 ) } & = & \left(1 + \frac{m_a m_b}{(m_a + m_b)^2}\right ) \frac{g^2 m_a m_b ( m_a + m_b)}{2 r^2}. \label{eq_eihhrv2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] comparing the eih potential @xmath260 in this gauge of eq .
( [ eq_eihhrv1 ] ) with the long distance component of the leading order spin - independent potential in eq .
( [ eq : po ] ) we find full agreement for the relativistic corrections to the @xmath255 potential .
however , comparing the eih potential @xmath261 in this gauge of eq .
( [ eq_eihhrv2 ] ) with the classical component of our spin - independent potential in eq .
( [ eq : so ] ) we see that the two do not agree !
the reason for this discrepancy is that we elected to use a nonrelativistic iteration when we performed the second born iteration of the leading order potential in eq .
( [ eq : iteration00b ] ) .
this procedure , however , is not self - consistent when we are interested in equations of motion at nlo , for which we must account for the leading relativistic corrections in the iteration . in particular , we must use expressions for the potential and the propagator in eq .
( [ eq : iteration00a ] ) which include the leading relativistic corrections in this sections refers to the iteration being performed at nlo in the relativistic expansion . ]
@xmath262\ ] ] @xmath263\ ] ] which yields a second born iteration amplitude @xmath264\nonumber\\ & \simeq \hspace*{-5pt } & h+{1\over m_am_b}\left(p_0 ^ 2h+\delta_{rs}h_{rs}\right ) \left(\frac{1}{4 } + \frac{7}{4 } \frac{m_a
m_b}{m_r^2}\right ) \nonumber\\ & \simeq \hspace*{-5pt } & - i \hspace*{0.6pt } 4 \pi g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2 \hspace*{1pt } { l\over q^2 } { m_r\over p_0 }    + \frac{g^2 m_a^2 m_b^2}{m_a + m_b } \left(1 + \frac{7 ( m_a + m_b)^2}{m_a m_b } \right)s .
\label{eq : jk}\end{aligned}\ ] ] subtracting this iterated amplitude which includes all corrections to nlo from the scattering amplitude @xmath265 of eq .
( [ eq_amplo_00 ] ) we find then the second order potential @xmath266\nonumber\\ & = \hspace*{-5pt}&\int{d^3q\over ( 2\pi)^3 } e^{-i\vec{q}\cdot\vec{r } } \ , g^2 m_a m_b \left [ \left((m_a + m_b ) + { m_am_b\over m_a+m_b}\right ) s + { 41\over 5}l\right]\nonumber\\ & = \hspace*{-5pt } & \left(1 + \frac{m_a m_b}{(m_a + m_b)^2}\right ) \frac{g^2 m_a m_b ( m_a + m_b)}{2 r^2 }    - { 41 g^2 m_a m_b \hbar \over 10 \pi r^3 } \label{eq : sf}\end{aligned}\ ] ] and observe that now the classical component agrees with the @xmath12 eih potential of eq .
( [ eq_eihhrv2 ] ) .
thus we have shown that if we consistently take into account the @xmath4 and @xmath5 corrections beyond newtonian physics we reproduce the eih lagrangian in a certain gauge . from the resulting eih lagrangian
we could evaluate observables such as the precession of the perihelion of mercury which must clearly be independent of the gauge used .
the inclusion of the @xmath4 corrections is required since the equations of motion can be used to describe bound states where @xmath267 by the virial theorem
.    however , our methods are clearly clumsy for the calculation of classical observables .
recently , goldberger and rothstein have developed an effective field theory of gravity which is optimized for calculating classical observables of bound states called nrgr @xcite . here
the external particles are static sources so that no loops are to be calculated in their theory when calculating classical observables since the only propagating particles present are gravitons which are massless and thus the loop expansion in nrgr corresponds to an expansion in @xmath69 . in the nrgr framework
the spin - dependent classical equations of motion were calculated recently to nlo by porto and rothstein @xcite so that we will not continue here to evaluate the corresponding spin - dependent classical potentials consistently taking into account all relativistic @xmath1 effects in the iteration .
a.  einstein , l.  infeld and b.  hoffmann , annals math .
* 39 * , 65 ( 1938 ) .
j.  f.  donoghue , phys .
lett .   * 72 * , 2996 ( 1994 ) [ arxiv : gr - qc/9310024 ] .
j.  f.  donoghue , phys .
d * 50 * , 3874 ( 1994 ) [ arxiv : gr - qc/9405057 ] .
j.  f.  donoghue , arxiv : gr - qc/9512024 .
c.  p.  burgess , living rev .
* 7 * , 5 ( 2004 ) [ arxiv : gr - qc/0311082 ] .
n.  e.  j.  bjerrum - bohr , j.  f.  donoghue and b.  r.  holstein , phys .
d * 68 * , 084005 ( 2003 ) [ erratum - ibid .
d * 71 * , 069904 ( 2005 ) ] [ arxiv : hep - th/0211071 ] .
b.  r.  holstein , phys .
d * 74 * , 084030 ( 2006 ) .
+ b.  r.  holstein , arxiv : gr - qc/0607051 .
holstein , a.  ross , arxiv:0802.0715 [ hep - ph ] .
y. iwasaki , prog .
phys . * 46 * , 1587 ( 1971 ) .
i.  b.  khriplovich and g.  g.  kirilin , j.  exp .
phys .   * 95 * , 981 ( 2002 ) [ zh .  eksp .
* 95 * , 1139 ( 2002 ) ] [ arxiv : gr - qc/0207118 ] .
i.  b.  khriplovich and g.  g.  kirilin , econf * c0306234 * , 1361 ( 2003 ) [ j.  exp .
phys .   * 98 * , 1063 ( 2004  zetfa,125,1219 - 1228.2004 ) ] [ arxiv : gr - qc/0402018 ] .
n.  e.  j.  bjerrum - bohr , j.  f.  donoghue and b.  r.  holstein , phys .
d * 67 * , 084033 ( 2003 ) [ erratum - ibid .
d * 71 * , 069903 ( 2005 ) ] [ arxiv : hep - th/0211072 ] .
g.  t hooft and m.  j.  g.  veltman , annales poincare phys .
a * 20 * , 69 ( 1974 ) .
j.  sucher , phys .
d * 49 * , 4284 ( 1994 ) .
s.  deser and p.  van nieuwenhuizen , phys .
d * 10 * , 411 ( 1974 ) .
g.  g.  kirilin , nucl .
b * 728 * , 179 ( 2005 ) [ arxiv : gr - qc/0507070 ] .
holstein , a.  ross , arxiv:0802.0717 [ hep - ph ] .
k.  hiida and h.  okamura , prog .
* 47 * , 1743 ( 1972 ) .
b.  m.  barker and r.  f.  oconnell , phys .
d * 12 * , 329 ( 1975 ) .
w.  d.  goldberger and i.  z.  rothstein , phys .
d * 73 * , 104029 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0409156 ] .
w.  d.  goldberger and i.  z.  rothstein , gen .
* 38 * , 1537 ( 2006 ) [ int .
j.  mod .
d * 15 * , 2293 ( 2006 ) ] [ arxiv : hep - th/0605238 ] .
w.  d.  goldberger , arxiv : hep - ph/0701129 .
w.  d.  goldberger and i.  z.  rothstein , phys .
d * 73 * , 104030 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0511133 ]
. b.  kol and m.  smolkin , arxiv:0712.2822 [ hep - th ] .
b.  kol and m.  smolkin , arxiv:0712.4116 [ hep - th ] .
r.  a.  porto , phys .
d * 73 * , 104031 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : gr - qc/0511061 ] .
r.  a.  porto and i.  z.  rothstein , phys .
lett .   * 97 * , 021101 ( 2006 ) [ arxiv : gr - qc/0604099 ] .
r.  a.  porto , arxiv:0710.5150 [ hep - th ] .
r.  a.  porto and i.  z.  rothstein , arxiv:0712.2032 [ gr - qc ] .