Meson Spectroscopy at B factories 8 GeV e GeV e + BaBar Belle
Talk Outline X(3872) Y(4260) X(3940) Y(3940) Y(4325) D sJ (2317) D sJ (2460) Stephen Olsen U. of Hawai’I & 高能所 北京 PPP7 NTU, Taipei June 7-11,2007
B-factories are Charm & Charmonium factories c & cc meson production mechanisms B meson decays e + e - annihilation collisions e + e - radiative return (isr)
D & D s production in B decays More than 1 charmed particle/B meson u q d D,D*,.. ,.. s c q D,D*, D s,D s *,..
cc production in B decays j=½ J = 0 or 1 Spectator model says J cc = 0 or 1 should dominate exclusive B K(cc) decays.
Allowed decays all have Bf~10 -3 from PDG2004 c K 0.9 x10 -3 J K 1.0 x10 -3 J/ K* 1.4 x10 -3 ’ K 0.7 x10 -3 ’ K* 0.9 x10 -3 c0 K 0.6 x10 -3 c1 K 0.7 x10 -3 J/ K x10 -3 B K cc(J=2) still not seen
DD J PC = 0 ++, 2 ++ e + e - cc (continuum) c c (e + e - cc)> ( (4S))
Radiative return J PC = 1 -- c e + e - DD e + e - (cc) D,D*,..
e + e - J/ + (cc) J/ X X (almost) always contains (cc) C(X) = +1 consistent with bkg c c c0 c’c’ M(X)
All of these processes have produced discoveries/surprises B decays: c ’, X(3872), Y(3940) e + e - cc continuum: D**’s,D sJ (2317),… DD: Z(3940) Radiative return: Y(4260), Y(4320) e + e - J/ cc: X(3940)
These results have received considerable interest
SPIRES: find cn BaBar and topcite=250+ 1) Observation of a narrow meson decaying to D+(s) pi0 at a mass of 2.32-GeV/c**2. By BABAR Collaboration (B. Aubert et al.).. Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.90:242001,2003. B. Aubert et al. Cited 393 times393 times 2) Observation of CP violation in the B0 meson system. By BABAR Collaboration (B. Aubert et al.). SLAC-PUB-8904, BABAR-PUB-01-18, Jul Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.87:091801,2001. B. Aubert et al. Cited 385 times385 times 3) Measurement of the CP violating asymmetry amplitude sin 2beta. By BABAR Collaboration (B. Aubert et al.).. Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.89:201802,2002. B. Aubert et al. Cited 364 times364 times D sJ =most cited BaBar result
SPIRES: find cn Belle and topcite=250+ 1) Observation of large CP violation in the neutral B meson system. By Belle Collaboration (K. Abe et al.). Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.87:091802,2001. Cited 398 timesK. Abe et al.398 times 2) Observation of a narrow charmonium - like state in exclusive B+- ---> K+- pi+ pi- J / psi decays. By Belle Collaboration (S.K. Choi et al.). Sep pp. Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.91:262001,2003S.K. Choi et al. Cited 279 times279 times 3) A Measurement of the branching fraction for the inclusive B ---> X(s) gamma decays with BELLE. By Belle Collaboration (K. Abe et al.). Published in Phys.Lett.B511: ,2001K. Abe et al. Cited 278 times278 times 4) An Improved measurement of mixing induced CP violation in the neutral B meson system. By Belle Collaboration (K. Abe et al.). Published in Phys.Rev.D66:071102,2002.K. Abe et al. Cited 252 times times X(3872) J = 2 nd most cited Belle paper
The D** mesons B + →D* - π + π + B + →D - π + π + Belle: 65 M BB PRD 69, (2004) Spectroscopy and allowed transitions of D mesons
The D sJ mesons D sJ (2317) → D s π 0 D sJ (2460) → D s *π 0 BABAR: 91 fb-1 PRL 90, (2003 CLEO: 13.5 fb-1 PRD 68, (2003 BaBar: 240 fb-1 PRL 97, (2006) Belle: 449 M BB hep-ex/ D sJ (2860) → DK
The D**/D sJ meson puzzle (two slides only) ~145 MeV ~0 MeV BaBar CLEO Belle
Replace a u/d quark with an s quark u c s c + ~145 MeV ≈(m s -m u ) S-Wave P-Wave u c s c No penalty
Charmonium is of particular interest because it is a good system to use to search for non-qq mesons
a cc meson has to fit into these slots:
“XYZ” particles X(3872) – J/ in B K J/ Z(3930) –DD in DD Y(3940) – J/ in B K J/ X(3940) – e + e - J/ X & e + e - J/ DD* Y(4260) – J/ in e + e - J/ Y(4320) – + - ’ in e + e - + - ’ Are these charmonium states?
Z(3931) DD at Belle 41 11 evts (5.5 ) M=3931 4 2 MeV 20 8 3 MeV sin 4 (J=2) Matches well to c2 ’ expectations M(DD) GeV Uehara (Belle) PRL 96, (2006)
Z(3930): candidate for the c2 ’ 3931 M= 3931 MeV is ~45 MeV low =20MeV too narrow? Masses from Barnes, Godfrey & Swanson PRD 72, (2005)
e + e - J/ X(3940) e + e - J/ + X Pakhlov (Belle) PRL 98, (2007)
X(3940) D*D is strong ( DD & J/ not seen) D B(D*D)>45% consistent with 100% B(DD)<41% From X(3940) → D * D: M = (3943 ± 6 ± 6) MeV = (15.4 10.1) MeV < 52 MeV at 90%CL Pakhlov (Belle) PRL 98, (2007) Higher statistics Belle results this Summer
Is the X(3940) the c ”? 3940 M= 3943 MeV is ~150 MeV low <52MeV too narrow?
X(3872) in B K J/ M( J ) ’ J/ X(3872) J/ PRL 91, 2.9 MeV
Also seen in pp X(3872) CDF hep-ex/ Production properties similar to those of the ’ X(3872) D0 PRL 93, (2004) PRL 93, (2004)
C=+1 is pretty well established X(3872) J/ seen in: & PRL M( looks like a X(3872) ” ”J/ seen CDF Belle hep-ex/ Belle Swanson PL B588, 189(2004)
ll |cos l | 2 /dof = 34/9 |cos | |cos | 2 /dof=34/ rule out 0 ++ & 0 -+ J k x J Ruled out by Belle
Angular analysis from CDF CDF PRL (2007) 1 ++ or 2 -+
X(3872) has no satisfactory cc assignment 3872 r J/ too small & r ( J/ ) too big c1 ’ c J/ ispin forbidden D 0 D 0 thresh. suppressed B Kcc(J=2) suppressed c2
Mass is near the D 0 D* 0 threshold PDG06: m D0 + m D*0 = ± 0.8 MeV PDG M X3872 : ± 0.5 MeV D* 0 D 0 ”binding energy” = 0.4 ± 0.6 MeV CLEO hep-ex/ ± 0.4 MeV My average: ± 0.4 MeV
hh bound states (hadronium) ?? pn DD* deuteron: loosely bound 3-q color singlets with M d = m p +m n - Hadronium (dueson) : loosely bound q-q color singlets with M = m D + m D* - attractive nuclear force attractive force?? N.. A. Tornqvist, Phys Lett. B 590, 209(2004) F. Close, P.R. Page, Phys. Lett. B 578, 119 (2003) E.S. Swanson, Phys. Lett, B (2004) E. Braaten, M. Kusunoki, S. Nussinov, Phy. Rev. Lett. 93, (2004) M. Voloshin & L. Okun, JETP Lett. 23, 333 (1976) A. DeRujula H.Georgi & S.Glashow, PRL 38, 317 (1977)
Belle: Threshold peak in B KD 0 D 0 0 M= 0.7 0.8 MeV Br(X D 0 D 0 0 ) Br(X J/ ) ~ M(DD ) EE Gokhroo (Belle) PRL (2006) ~2 higher than in the J/ y mode
BaBar confirms the B (D 0 D *0 ) K threshold enhancement BaBar, Moriond 2007 The is also 2.5σ high
Molecular models have trouble with a large DD decay rate
X(3872) = D 0 D* 0 bound state? J PC = 1 ++ is favored M ≈ m D0 + m D0* Large isospin violation is natural ( & was predicted) : |D 0 D* 0 > = 1/ 2 (|10> - |00>) (X J/ ) < (X J/ ) was predicted (X D 0 D 0 0 ) too large? X DD peak mass > m D0 + m D0* Equal mixture of I=1 & I =0 Swanson PLB 598, 197 (2004) Tornqvist PLB 590, 209 (2004) Swanson PLB 588, 189 (2004)
Real or virtual DD* state? hep-ph/ J/ DDDD DDDD
diquark-antidiquark? uc u c dc d c Xu=Xu= Xd=Xd= B+K+XuB+K+Xu B0K0XdB0K0Xd BaBar Maiani et al predict: M = M(X u ) – M(X d ) = 8 3 MeV BaBar PRD R (2006): M = 2.7 1.3 0.2 MeV L. Maiani, F. Piccinini, A. D. Polosa, V. Riquer PRD71: (2005) Predict a doublet of states:
Y(3940) in B K J/ M≈3940 ± 11 MeV ≈ 92 ± 24 MeV Belle PRL94, (2005) M( J/ ) MeV (Y 3940 J/ > 7 MeV (an SU F (3) violating decay) ~ this is 10 3 x ( ’ J/ (another SU F (3) violating decay) if the Z(3930) is the c2 ’ the Y(3940) mass is too high for it to be the c1 ’
Is there a cc slot for Y(3940) ? Can M( c1 ’)>M( c2 ’)? c1 ’ Mass is low c”c” “ “ c0 ’
e + e - isr Y(4260) at BaBar 233 fb -1 e e + J/ pb (Y4260 J/ ) > 90% CL Y(4260) X.H. Mo et al, PL B640, 182 (2006) 4260 BaBar PRL95, (2005) Not seen in e + e - hadrons BES data ~3nb ~50pb
Y(4260) at Belle M=4295 MeV = 133 MeV For ’ J/ in the same data: M( ’) = 0.1 MeV (PDG: M( ’)= 0.04) Belle hep-ex/
Y(4260) at CLEO-III Consistent results 13.3 fb -1 ISR (1S)- (4S) 13.3 fb -1 CLEO PRD (2006) M = 4 MeV = 5 MeV
No 1 -- cc slot for the Y(4260) X.H. Mo et al, hep-ex/
Is the Y(4260) a cc-gluon hybrid? cc qq-gluon excitations predicted in lowest 1 -- cc-gluon mass expected at ~4.3 GeV relevant open charm threshold is D**D (~4.28 GeV) ( J/ ) larger than that for normal charmonium (e + e - ) smaller than that for ordinary charmonium Horn & Mandula PRD 17, 898 (1977) Banner et al, PRD 56, 7039 (1997); Mei & Luo, IJMPA 18, (2003) Isgur, Koloski & Paton PRL 54, 869 (1985) McNeile, Michael & Pennanen PRD 65, (2002) Close & Page NP B443, 233 (1995) Y(4260)seems to fit all of the above!!!
DD** threshold in relation to the “Y(4260)” 4.28-m D D** spectrum M( J/ ) GeV No obvious distortions D1DD1D D2DD2D
A ’ enhancement at 4325MeV Incompatible with (4415), nor well described by Y(4260) A single resonance can describe the structure (<5.7 GeV/c 2 ) well mass=(4324 24) MeV/c 2, =(172 33) MeV ( statistical errors only ) Nbkg = 3.1 1.0 Nevt = 68 (<5.7 GeV/c 2 ) 2 -prob < 5.7 GeV/c 2 Y(4260) 6.5 (4415)1.2 Y(4320)29% e + e - ISR ’ M=4324 24 MeV = 172 33 MeV above all D**D thresholds S.W.Ye QWG-2006 June 2006 Not Compatible with the Y(4260) D1DD1D D2DD2D 298 fb -1 (BaBar) hep-ex/
BaBar hep-ex/ (e + e - DD) Y(4325)
(e + e - D*D ( * ) s 4 GeV Belle: ISR + Partial Reconstruction Pakhlova (Belle) PRL 98, (2007) (e + e - D* + D* - ) (e + e - D + D* - ) (4040) (4160) (4415) Y (4260) Y (4325)
D*D* DD* DD tot The parameters of the above-threshold 1 – charmonium states determined from fits to tot with incoherent BW’s are probably not very reliable
summary (XYZ) Z(3931) ( DD) –Probably the c2 ’ X(3940) (e + e - J/ X) –C=+1 –Could be the c ” (albeit with some stretching) X(3872): –J PC = 1 ++ –Br(X J/ ) large –Br(X D 0 D 0 0 ) seen; ~ 9xBr(X J/y) D*D
Summary (XYZ) cont’d Y(3940) J/ – ( Y 3940 J/ ) >7 MeV (huge!) “Y(4260)” + - J/ – (y 4260 J/ )>1.6 MeV – J PC =1 --, not seen in e + e - hadrons -no obvious D**D threshold distortions “Y(4325)” + - ’ – above all D**D thresholds 233 fb -1
conclusions There seems to be a new hadron spectroscopy in the 3.5~4.5 GeV mass region –Maybe more than one –Bodes well for BESIII, Super B factories & PANDA The new states are characterized by large partial widths (Bfs) to hadrons+J/ – Br(X(3872) J/ ) > 4.3% (Isospin=1) – (Y(3940) J/ ) > 7 MeV (SU(3) octet) – (Y(4260) J/ ) > 1.6 MeV There is no apparent transition at the D**D mass threshold The above-threshold 1 -- charmonium state parameters listed in the PDG are probably not reliable (mine)
Expect lots of results from Belle this summer
謝謝
Look at e + e - J/ D(D ( * ) ) Reconstruct a J/ & a D use D 0 K - + & D + K - + + Determine recoil mass
Inclusive B Kx from BaBar ? Fully reconstructed B - tags
Braaten et al: X D D *0 mass spectrum Theoretical prediction for a loosely bound D D * state.
BaBar looked for a charged partner of the X(3872) and excluded isospin 1: BF(B 0 X - K + ) BF(X J/ψ - 0 ) < 5.4 x BF(B - X - K 0 ) BF(X J/ψ - 0 ) < 2.2 x c.f BF(B 0 X 0 K+ ) BF(X 0 J/ψ -- + ) =(1.28 0.41 ) x 10 -5
Comments on the D 0 D 0 0 mass peak Fitted M: 0.7 0.8 MeV M–(m D0 + m D*0 ) = 0.7 MeV xPDG06 error on m D0 (could be 2.0 MeV) PDG M X3872 : 0.5 MeV Here error on m D0 drops out Nominally ~2.3 above D 0 D* 0 threshold (but errors are non-Gaussian) ~2 discrepancy DD* “Binding Energy?”:
Y(4260) at Belle MXMX Select e+e- ℓ + ℓ - +X; N chg =4 M ℓ + ℓ - =M J/ 30MeV; p J/y >2 GeV; M >0.4GeV | data 4.2<M J/ <4.4 MC M=4295 MeV = 133 MeV For ’ J/ in the same data: M( ’) = 0.1 MeV (PDG: M( ’)= 0.04)
M
Another one from BaBar? (4352) ’ (produced via radiative return)