 contribution. If such an enhancement were observed in the experiment, it would provide an important and unambiguous determination of the weak $\pi NN$ coupling constant $h_{\pi}^{1}$. However, a recent schematic calculation of $A_{\gamma}$ by Khriplovich and Korkin [@Khriplovich:2000mb], partly suggested by one of the present author, showed critical contradiction to Oka’s result, with a huge suppression of $A_{\gamma}$ at the energies $\omega_{\gamma}\gtrsim3$ MeV.

On the experimental side, a measurement of the asymmetry $A_{\gamma}$ in $\vec{\gamma}+d\rightarrow n+p$ was considered in the 80’s by E. D. Earle *et al.* [@Earle:1981; @Earle:1988fc] but no sensitive result was reported. However, due to advances in experimental techniques and instrumentation, the measurement of $A_{\gamma}$ becomes more feasible nowadays and several groups at JLab [@jlab-lett00], IASA (Athens), LEGS (BNL), TUNL, and SPring-8 show interest in such a measurement. It is therefore important to understand and improve previous estimates.

In this work, we carefully re-examine the $\vec{\gamma}+d\rightarrow n+p$ process with two main purposes:

1.  Determine how the enhancement of the $h_{\pi}^{1}$ contribution in Oka’s results will change when the calculation is completed with missing parity-admixed components in the final state, in particular in the $^{3}P_{1}$ channel. The role of this last one was revealed by the schematic estimate of Ref. [@Khriplovich:2000mb].

2.  Determine the uncertainty of Khriplovich and Korkin’s calculation in which very simple wave functions are used.

It is straightforward to deal with the point 1. In Ref. [@Khriplovich:2000mb], a nice and simple argument about the cancellation of the $h_{\pi}^{1}$ contribution from the final $^{3}P_{0}$, $^{3}P_{1}$, and $^{3}P_{2}$ states along with their parity-admixed partners was given. However, the argument assumed the absence of tensor as well as spin-orbit forces, which are important components of the $NN$ interaction. In order to address these two points (missing components
contribution. If such an enhancement were observed in the experiment, it would provide an important and unambiguous decision of the fallible $ \pi NN$ coupling constant $ h_{\pi}^{1}$. However, a recent conventional calculation of $ A_{\gamma}$ by Khriplovich and Korkin [ @Khriplovich:2000 mb ], partly suggested by one of the present author, picture critical contradiction to Oka ’s result, with a huge suppression of $ A_{\gamma}$ at the energy $ \omega_{\gamma}\gtrsim3 $ MeV. 

 On the experimental side, a measurement of the asymmetry $ A_{\gamma}$ in $ \vec{\gamma}+d\rightarrow n+p$ was considered in the 80 ’s by E. D. Earle * et al. * [ @Earle:1981; @Earle:1988fc ] but no sensible result was reported. However, due to advances in experimental techniques and instrumentality, the measurement of $ A_{\gamma}$ becomes more feasible nowadays and several groups at JLab [ @jlab - lett00 ], IASA (Athens), LEGS (BNL), TUNL, and SPring-8 show sake in such a measurement. It is therefore important to understand and better previous estimates. 

 In this work, we carefully re - analyze the $ \vec{\gamma}+d\rightarrow n+p$ process with two main purposes: 

 1.   Determine how the enhancement of the $ h_{\pi}^{1}$ contribution in Oka ’s results will transfer when the calculation is completed with missing parity - admixed components in the final state, in particular in the $ ^{3}P_{1}$ channel. The role of this last one was revealed by the schematic estimate of Ref. [ @Khriplovich:2000 mb ]. 

 2.   Determine the uncertainty of Khriplovich and Korkin ’s calculation in which very simple wave function are used. 

 It is straightforward to share with the point 1. In Ref. [ @Khriplovich:2000 mb ], a nice and simple argument about the cancellation of the $ h_{\pi}^{1}$ contribution from the concluding $ ^{3}P_{0}$, $ ^{3}P_{1}$, and $ ^{3}P_{2}$ states along with their parity bit - admixed partners was given. However, the controversy assumed the absence of tensor as well as spin - orbit forces, which are important components of the $ NN$ interaction. In order to address these two points (missing component
 cojtribution. If such an enmancement were oywerved in ths experioent, it would provide an implrrant qnd unambiguous determknation ov the weqk $\pm NN$ coupling coiatant $h_{\in}^{1}$. Howsyer, a cecent schematig calculatimn of $A_{\gamma}$ bf Yhxiplovich and Korkin [@Khriplovich:2000mb], pwrtly sighested by one jf tnq prssent author, showed critical contrzdictioi to Oka’s resuly, with a huge suppression lf $A_{\hamma}$ at the energles $\omega_{\ganma}\geesim3$ MeV.

On tfe experimtncal side, a jeasurement of the asymmetry $A_{\gxmma}$ nn $\vec{\gamma}+e\rughhdrrow n+p$ waw confidered in tmv 80’s by A. D. Earke *et al.* [@Earle:1981; @Eacle:1988fx] but no sensitive revult was reported. Rowever, dge to advances in ezpwrimettal tecfbiqjes aid jnstrulenvation, the jeasurement of $A_{\gamma}$ becomes kowv feasible nosadays agd several groups at JLab [@jlab-lett00], IASA (Atgens), LEGS (BNL), TUNL, and WPring-8 show interest ln such a measurement. It is therefore important to understdnd aid imkrive pfwvlous estimates.

In this work, we carefully re-exaijnt tme $\vec{\gamma}+d\righbarrow n+p$ process eihh jwo main purpores:

1.  Dzfedmine how the enhajcement of tye $h_{\pi}^{1}$ cogtrinution in Oka’s results will change when rhe calculation is completed cith mossinb parity-admixed componeuts in the final dtate, in lxrticular in the $^{3}P_{1}$ bhantel. The role of this last jne was rxvealzd by thd scnematis estimate of Rcx. [@Khriplovich:2000mb].

2.  Dftermnne tve uncertalnty of Khriplovich and Korkin’s calculation im fhibh very snmple eave functionf are used.

It ix straiyhtfordard to dezl with the point 1. In Ref. [@Khripnlvich:2000mb], a nire and siiple argyment acuut the cancelkation of the $h_{\pi}^{1}$ cintribution from tme fivzl $^{3}P_{0}$, $^{3}P_{1}$, and $^{3}P_{2}$ stcues along with theor oarytj-adkivad partners fas eivdm. Howdver, tht avguoent assumed the absence of fensor as well as xpln-orbit firces, whych are imporyant components of the $IN$ intxractipn. Yn order to address these two loints (midsikg components
contribution. If such an enhancement were observed experiment, would provide important and unambiguous NN$ constant $h_{\pi}^{1}$. However, recent schematic calculation $A_{\gamma}$ by Khriplovich and Korkin [@Khriplovich:2000mb], suggested by one of the present author, showed critical contradiction to Oka’s result, a huge suppression of $A_{\gamma}$ at the energies $\omega_{\gamma}\gtrsim3$ MeV. On the experimental a of asymmetry in $\vec{\gamma}+d\rightarrow n+p$ was considered in the 80’s by E. D. Earle *et al.* [@Earle:1981; @Earle:1988fc] no sensitive result was reported. However, due to in experimental techniques and the measurement of $A_{\gamma}$ becomes feasible and several at [@jlab-lett00], (Athens), LEGS (BNL), and SPring-8 show interest in such a measurement. It is therefore important to understand and improve previous In this carefully re-examine $\vec{\gamma}+d\rightarrow process two main purposes: how the enhancement of the $h_{\pi}^{1}$ results will change when the calculation is completed missing parity-admixed in the final state, in particular the $^{3}P_{1}$ channel. The role of this last was revealed by the schematic estimate of Ref. [@Khriplovich:2000mb]. 2. Determine the uncertainty of Khriplovich calculation in which very wave functions are It straightforward deal the point In Ref. [@Khriplovich:2000mb], a nice and simple argument about the cancellation the $h_{\pi}^{1}$ contribution from the final $^{3}P_{0}$, $^{3}P_{1}$, and $^{3}P_{2}$ with parity-admixed partners was However, the argument assumed absence tensor as well as which important $NN$ In to address these two (missing components
 contribution. If such an enhanCement were ObserVed In tHe ExpeRimeNt, it would proviDE an iMportant and unambiguous DeterMiNAtioN Of The weAk $\pi NN$ cOUpLINg cOnStAnt $H_{\pI}^{1}$. hoWever, A reCent schEmatic calcUlaTiOn of $A_{\gamma}$ by kHrIplovich anD KoRkin [@KhriplovIch:2000Mb], partLy SugGEsted By oNe of tHe presENt authOr, showed cRiTIcal coNTradictION tO Oka’S result, with a huge sUPpREssion of $A_{\gamma}$ At the eNeRGiES $\OmeGa_{\gAmma}\gtrsim3$ mev.

On thE ExperimENtAL SIde, A Measurement of The asymmetrY $a_{\gaMma}$ in $\vEc{\GamMA}+d\righTarroW n+P$ Was Considered iN the 80’S by E. D. EarlE *et al.* [@EARle:1981; @EarlE:1988Fc] but no SensitIve ResUlt wAS rEpOrtEd. hOweVEr, Due TO adVances in ExPeRimenTal tECHNIqueS anD insTrumeNtation, the meaSurEmenT Of $A_{\Gamma}$ BecomEs moRe FeasiBle nowAdays AnD several groups aT JLaB [@jlab-lett00], iASa (ATheNs), lEGS (Bnl), TUNL, aNd SpriNg-8 show iNterest IN suCh A MEAsUrement. It is therefoRe IMPoRtant to uNderstANd AnD Improve pReVioUs esTIMates.

in thIS wOrk, we carEfully RE-eXaMine the $\VeC{\gamma}+D\rIghTarRow n+p$ PRoceSs with Two main pUrposES:

1.  Determine how tHE enhancement oF ThE $H_{\Pi}^{1}$ COntrIbuTion in Oka’s rEsulTS wilL chaNGe WheN The caLculaTiON iS Completed with missinG pArity-aDmixeD components in The final stATE, In particUlar IN tHE $^{3}P_{1}$ channel. The roLe of tHis last one WAs revealEd by tHe schemaTic estimaTE Of Ref. [@KhrIplOviCh:2000mB].

2.  DeTERmIne the uncertaINTy of khRiploviCh aNd KorkiN’s cAlcUlaTioN iN which verY simple wAvE fUnCtIonS are uSEd.

It is stRaIghTfOrwArd to DEal witH the pOint 1. in reF. [@khrIplovicH:2000Mb], A NIce aNd SiMple ArgUmEnt abOut tHE caNcellatIon of the $h_{\Pi}^{1}$ cONtriBuTiOn from tHe final $^{3}P_{0}$, $^{3}P_{1}$, and $^{3}P_{2}$ StAtes along wItH thEir parITY-admixed Partners was given. However, THe argumEnt AssumEd thE absence oF teNsor as WelL As spin-Orbit fOrces, WhIch ARE impoRTAnT coMpOnents of thE $nn$ inTeracTiOn. In Order to Address these two poiNTs (mIssing componeNts
 contribution. If such anenhancemen t wer e o bse rv ed i n th e experiment,i t wo uld provide an importa nt an du namb i gu ous d etermin a ti o n  of  t he  we ak $\ pi NN $ c oupling  constant$h_ {\ pi}^{1}$. Ho w ev er, a rece ntschematic ca lcu lation  o f $ A _{\ga mma }$ by  Khrip l ovichand Korki n[ @Khrip l ovich:2 0 0 0m b],partly suggestedb yo ne of the pres ent au th o r, s how edcritical c on tradi c tion to Ok a ’ s  re s ult, with a h uge suppres s ion  of $A _{ \ga m ma}$ a t the  e n erg ies $\omega _{\g amma}\gtr sim3$M eV.

On the exp erimen tal  si de,a  m ea sur em e nto fthe asy mmetry $ A_ {\ gamma }$ i n $ \ vec{ \ga mma} +d\ri ghtarrow n+p$  wa s co n sid eredin th e 80 ’s  by E . D. E arle*e t al.* [@Earle: 1981 ; @Earle: 198 8f c]bu t nos ensiti veres ult was  report e d.Ho w e v er , due to advancesin e xp erimenta l tech n iq ue s  and ins tr ume ntat i o n, th e me a su rement o f $A_{ \ ga mm a}$ bec om es mor efea sib le no w aday s andseveralgroup s  at JLab [@jla b -lett00], IAS A  ( A t he n s),LEG S (BNL), TU NL,a nd S Prin g -8  sh o w int erest  i n  s u ch a measurement. I tis the refor e important t o understa n d and impr ovep re v ious estimates .

In  this work ,  we care fully  re-exam ine the $ \ v ec{\gamm a}+ d\r igh tar r o wn+p$ processw i th t wo  main p urp oses:
1. De ter min ehow the e nhanceme nt  o fth e $ h_{\p i }^{1}$ c on tri bu tio n inO ka’s r esult s wi ll  c h ang e whent he c alcu la ti on i s c om plete d wi t h m issingparity-ad mix e d co mp on ents in  the final st at e, in part ic ula r in t h e  $^{3}P_ {1}$ channel. The roleo f thislas t one  was  revealed  by  the s che m atic e stimat e ofRe f.[ @ Khrip l o vi ch: 20 00mb].

2. Det ermin etheuncerta inty of Khriplovic h  an d Korkin’s ca lcu lati o n  i n w h ic h  ve ry sim p l e wave function s are used .It  is straig h tfo rw ard todeal wi th th e  point1. In Ref . [@Khrip lo vich : 2 000 mb], a nic e and si mple argu m ent a b ou t the  ca ncella ti onof th e $h_{ \ pi} ^{1}$  contr ib utionfromth e final$^{3}P_{0}$, $^{3}P_{1} $, and  $^{3 }P_ {2}$ stat esa lon g with th eirparity-adm ixe d p artne rsw as gi ven. Ho wev e r, th e ar g ument ass u me d t h e  a bsence of t e n s oras we lla s spin -orb it forces, whicha re important c ompo n e nts  of the$N N$ interaction . I no r der to a dd ress thesetwo poin ts (miss ing co mponen ts
 contribution._If such_an enhancement were observed_in the_experiment,_it would_provide_an important and_unambiguous determination of_the weak $\pi NN$_coupling constant $h_{\pi}^{1}$._However,_a recent schematic calculation of $A_{\gamma}$ by Khriplovich and Korkin [@Khriplovich:2000mb], partly suggested by_one_of the_present_author,_showed critical contradiction to Oka’s_result, with a huge suppression_of $A_{\gamma}$_at the energies $\omega_{\gamma}\gtrsim3$ MeV.

On the experimental side,_a_measurement of the_asymmetry $A_{\gamma}$ in $\vec{\gamma}+d\rightarrow n+p$ was considered in the_80’s by E. D. Earle *et_al.* [@Earle:1981; @Earle:1988fc]_but_no_sensitive result was reported._However, due to advances in experimental_techniques and instrumentation, the measurement of_$A_{\gamma}$ becomes more feasible nowadays and several_groups at JLab [@jlab-lett00], IASA (Athens),_LEGS (BNL), TUNL, and SPring-8_show interest_in such a measurement. It_is therefore important_to understand_and improve previous_estimates.

In this work, we carefully re-examine_the $\vec{\gamma}+d\rightarrow n+p$_process with two main purposes:

1. _Determine_how the enhancement_of_the_$h_{\pi}^{1}$ contribution_in Oka’s results_will_change when_the_calculation is completed with missing parity-admixed_components_in the final state, in particular in_the $^{3}P_{1}$ channel. The_role_of this last one_was revealed by the schematic_estimate of Ref. [@Khriplovich:2000mb].

2.  Determine_the uncertainty_of Khriplovich_and Korkin’s calculation in which very simple wave functions are used.

It_is straightforward to deal with the_point 1. In Ref._[@Khriplovich:2000mb], a_nice_and simple argument_about_the cancellation_of the $h_{\pi}^{1}$ contribution from the final_$^{3}P_{0}$, $^{3}P_{1}$,_and $^{3}P_{2}$ states along with their_parity-admixed partners was given._However,_the argument assumed the absence of_tensor as well as spin-orbit forces,_which are important components of_the_$NN$_interaction. In order to address_these two points (missing components