1. Belle Hawaii activities in Belle New particles in BES & Belle S. L. Olsen

2. Belle highlights 2002-03 1 st measurement of  2 from B      1 st observation of B  K*l  l  Discovery of a new charmonium state 1 st measurement of  3 (B  KD 0 Dalitz plot) Hint of new physics in B   K S Measurement of Br(B      ) 1 st radiative charm decay D   … Belle has submitted/published 70 papers (30 since August 2002) SM

3. Papers primarily from Hawaii group New charmonium state –(hep-ex/0309032) S.-K. Choi, S.L. Olsen et al., B  D CP K –(hep-ex/0304032) S.K. Swain, T.E. Browder et al., (accepted by PRD) B  B mixing with B  D*  (partial recon) –PRD 67 092004 (2003) Y.H. Zheng, T.E. Browder et al., B   c K* 1 st observation –PRL 90, 071801 (2003) F. Fang, et al., B  hh –PRD 66, 092002 (2002) B.C.K. Casey, et al.,  c ’ discovery –PRL 89, 102001 (2002) S.-K. Choi, S.L. Olsen, et al., B  ppK 1 st observation (PRL --- F. Fang) A CP for B  h  h  (PRD --- B. Casey) B-  K 1 (1270) J/  (PRL --- S.-K. Choi, S.L. Olsen))

4. Hawaii service in Belle TOF system (essential for all CPV studies) –Calibration: Mike Jones –Reconstruction: Mike Peters Tracking (essential to all analyses) –Kalman filter (fitting): Karim Trabelsi –K S   selection: Fang Fang Trigger –Level 0: Hulya Guler –Level 1.5 (SVD-CDC matching): Kirika Uchida Background simulations (for SVD upgrade) –Spent particles: Karim Trabelsi –Synchrotron radiation: Sanjay Swain MC –generator tuning: Rolf Seuster –Event generation: Eric Dodson

5. Hawaii service in Belle (cont’d) Utilities –Run-by-run CM energy calibration: Sanjay Swain –N(BB) determination: Sanjay Swain –General event selection criteria: Brendan Casey SVD upgrade –Electronics: Gary Varner –Opto-Mechanical: Marc Rosen –Software: Karim Trabelsi & Kirika Uchida Upgrades –DAQ: Gary Varner & Yang Heng Zheng –Pixels: Fang Fang Administrative –Analysis coordinator: Tom Browder –Co-spokesperson: S. Olsen

6. Other analyses underway CPV in B  D*  (Trabelsi & Peters) CPV in B   c K S (Fang) CPV in B  D CP K (Swain, Kent) Charm fragmentation (Seuster) B  K  J/  & B  K  ’ (Guler) Search for 1 h c1 (i.e. 1 P c1 cc state) (Fang) B   ’ (980)X (Uchida) New particle searches (Olsen) …

7. New particles in Belle & BES New state in B  K     J/  –M  J/  = 3872 MeV (= M D + M D* ) –inconsistent with a cc state Low mass pp enhancement in –J/    pp (BES) –B  pp h (Belle) m(pp) ??? J/  pp B  Kpp ???

8. New state in B  K     J/ 

9.  c0,1,2 J/  ’’ cc cc ‘ cc level diagram: 3 D c2 3 D c3 1h1?1h1? charmonium levels  ”( 3 D c1 ) DD threshold DD* threshold m=? 1 D c2 we found this last year in B  K K s K   c ’ These are narrow if M<M D +M D*

10. B  K K S K  c ’ studies) M bc for 40 MeV K S K  mass bins veto  c  c ‘ region what is this?? ? D c2  ggg?

11. Look for it in B  K     J/  (less background, better resolution) & B  K  c1 3 D c2   J/  &  c1  allowed –  (  c1 ) > ~5  (  J/  ) 1 D c2   J/  &  c1  not allowed

12. M(      l  l  ) –M(l + l  )  ’   J/  ?

13. M bc for 10 MeV M(  J/  ) bins X   J/  signal!!  ’   J/y

14. Magnify signal region

15.  E plots shows similar signal X   J/  signal

16. 3-d unbinned fit to  ’ region M bc M  J/  EE N  ’ = 489 ± 23 events M bc =5279.1 ± 0.1  (M bc )=2.6 ± 0.1 M  J/  =3685.5 ± 0.2  (M  j/  )=3.3 ± 0.2  E=-1.96 ± 0.4  (  E)=11.6 ± 0.4 f_tail = 3.6 ± 1.5% (B  K  ’  K  J/  )

17. 3-d unbinned fit to X(3872) region N X = 35.7 ± 6.8 events M bc =5279.1 (fixed)  (M bc )=2.6 (fixed) M  J/  =3871.5 ± 0.5  (M  j/  )=2.5 ± 0.5  E=-1.96 (fixed)  (  E)=11.6 (fixed) f_tail = 3.6 % (fixed) M bc M  J/  EE

18. reference mass to  ’ M X = M meas (  J/  ) – M meas (  ’ ) + M PDG (  ’ ) M X = 3872 ± 0.6 (stat) ± 0.5 (syst) MeV This comes from comparing M meas (  ’ ) with PDG value BW fit:  = 1.4 ± 0.7 MeV < 2.3 MeV @ 90% CL

19. M   tends to peak near limit background estimated from M bc -  E sidebands

20.    + bkgd fits pretty well

21. Look for X(3872)   c1 (  c1   J/  Select: B   K   J/  K  and J/  same as before E  >40 MeV plus  0 veto 15 < M  J/  -M  c1 <10MeV an allowed E1 transition; should be > 5  X   J/   Eichten, Lane & Quigg)

22. Do 2-d (M bc and M  c1 ) fits  ’ region N evts = 34.1 ± 6.9 ± 4.1 events expect 26 ± 4 events M bc M  c1 (  ’   c1   J/  )

23. M bc and M  c1 fits to X(3872) region N X = 3.7 ± 3.7 ± 2.2 events (<9.2 events @ 90% CL) M bc M  c1 No signal !!

24. Limit on  (X   c1 ):  (X   c1 )/  (X   J  ) = 0.35 ± 0.36 ± 0.21 < 0.89 @ 90% CL

25. Summary we see a ~10  signal for B  K X where: – X      J/ , –M X = 3872.0 ± 0.6 ± 0.5 MeV;  <2.3 MeV (90%CL) –  (X   c1 )/  (X      J/  (90%CL) hep-ex/0309032  PRL is this the 3 D 2 cc charmonium state? –Mass is too high (3872 vs 3810 MeV) –  (X   c1 )/  (X      J/  too small ( 5) angular analysis is necessary (but hard). M X ~ M D0 + M D0*. =3871.3 ± 1.0 MeV –could it be a D-D* bound state?

26. Low mass pp enhancement in J/    pp (BES)

27. Use BESII’s 58M J/  decays J/    pp Select J/    pp 4-C kinematic fit dE/dx for proton id non-pp bkg small main bkg from J/     pp ???? J/    c  c   pp (calibration reaction)

28. Study J/    0 pp bkg with MC & data J/    0 pp (data) three-body phase space Monte Carlo J/    0 pp   pp (MC) M(pp)-2m p (GeV)

29. The signal is real Really protons and antiprotons –dE/dx pid verified by BSC response Not bkgd from J/   hadrons –No hint of peaking in J/    0 pp data Not a QED background –E  pulls are symmetric –cos   distribution not peaked –not seen in off-J/  data

30. Fit to data M=1859 ± 3 +5 -25 MeV  < 30 MeV (90% CL) J/    pp M(pp)-2m p (GeV) 00.10.20.3 3-body phase space acceptance  2 /dof=56/56 fitted peak location acceptance weighted BW

31. Is M peak really less than 2m p ? No turnover at threshold  peak mass must be <2m p weight events by q 0 /q: (i.e remove threshold factor) M(pp)-2m p (GeV)

32. P-wave fit?? M=1876 ± 3 +? -?? MeV  < 30 MeV (90% CL)  2 /dof=59/56 OK!! M=2m p !!

33. D-wave fit?? M=1885 ± ? +? -?? MeV  < 30 MeV (90% CL)  2 /dof=1405/56 NG!!

34. cos   distribution 1+cos 2   (expected for J/     ) sin 2   M(pp)<1.9 GeV

35. include possible biases as (asymmetric) systematic errors (at least for now) M=1859 ± 3 +5 -25 MeV  < 30 MeV (90% CL)

36. Summary A large enhancement seen near 2m p in the M pp distribution for J/    pp decays. Not apparent in J/     pp decays Not consistent with any PDG meson state If it is an S-wave resonance: –M peak is below 2m p (M=1859 ±3 +5 –25 MeV) –full width is narrow (  <30 MeV) –dN/dcos   consistent with J PC = 0  PRL 91, 022001 (2003)

37. Comments peak near but below 2m p : a pp bound state? narrow width: why so long-lived? similar patterns seen in baryon-antibaryon systems produced in B meson decays –B  ppK B  ppD B  p  B  p  c 

38. Belle sees low-mass pp systems in B decays pp M M F. Fang B  ppK B  pp  B  ppK S B  ppK* pp M M

39. low-mass pp peaks in all (?) B  baryon decays pp M B  D 0 pp

40. Strange & charmed systems B   p   M(  p)  (GeV) BpcBpc M(  c  p)  (GeV) (in these cases, the peaking doesn’t seem to be right at threshold)

41. hh bound states (hadronium)?? +nhh deuteron: loosely bound 3-q color singlets with M d = 2m p -  hadronium: loosely bound 3-q or q-q color singlets with M b = 2m p -  attractive nuclear force attractive force?? There is lots & lots of literature about this possibility  

42. hadronic molecules a new spectroscopy?