1. Rumsfeld Hadrons: More questions than answers… Hadron 2005-07

2. 1. things that we know we know

3. Somethings are not mysterious m(Bc) = 6276.5 (4.0) (2.7)

4. Somethings are not mysterious m(Bc) = 6276.5 (4.0) (2.7) m(c)+m(b) ~ ½[m(psi) + m(upsilon)] = 6278.6 Heavy mass scale of c and b make agreements look artificially good better than 1 per mille !

5. Sigma*; Sigma; Lambda for Q infinite mass QCD OgE ~ 1/mass ! N Delta 300 200 Lambda(Q) Sigma(Q)

6. Sigma*; Sigma; Lambda for s c b 1115 1185 1385 2520 2455 2286 Sigma* Sigma Lambda strange charm bottom QCD OgE ~ 1/mass ! 70 200 75 170 5624 N Delta 300 200

7. Sigma*; Sigma; Lambda for s c b 1115 1185 1385 2520 2455 2286 Sigma* Sigma Lambda strange charm bottom QCD OgE ~ 1/mass ! 70 200 75 170 5830 5810 5624 20 186 CDF N Delta 300 200

8. Csi; Lambda for c b 2520 2455 2286 charm bottom 75 170 5830 5810 5624 20 186 M(b-c) = 3325 \pm 15

9. Csi; Lambda for c b 2520 2455 2286 charm bottom 75 170 5830 5810 5624 20 186 M(b-c) = 3325 \pm 15 csi_c = 2470 \pm 2 csi_b = 5795 \pm 17

10. Csi; Lambda for c b 2520 2455 2286 charm bottom 75 170 5830 5810 5624 20 186 M(b-c) = 3325 \pm 15 csi_c = 2470 \pm 2 csi_b = 5795 \pm 17 CDF 5792 \pm 4 D0: 5774 \pm 18

11. 1b. something that many havent realised that we don’t know 17

12. Csi; Lambda for c b 2520 2455 2286 charm bottom 75 170 5830 5810 5624 20 186 M(c-s) = 3325 \pm 15 csi_c = 2470 \pm 2 csi_b = 5795 \pm 17 CDF 5792 \pm 4 D0: 5774 \pm 18 All of that beautiful agreement of Hadron masses in the simplest quark model - e.g. see papers by Lipkin Karliner Rosner……

13. Csi; Lambda for c b 2520 2455 2286 charm bottom 75 170 5830 5810 5624 20 186 M(c-s) = 3325 \pm 15 csi_c = 2470 \pm 2 csi_b = 5795 \pm 17 CDF 5792 \pm 4 D0: 5774 \pm 18 What are these massive constituent quarks? Why work so well? When does/nt it work?

14. 1b. Some more things that we think we know 5

15. Old D_s states (L=0) FC Swanson PRD72 094004 2005 cs* model data 5

16. Radial 1- looks OK Ds*(2690) New D_s state (L=0) cs* model data FC Swanson PRD72 094004 2005

17. Radial 1- looks OK Test: B decays Ds*(2690) FC Thomas Lakhina Swanson 0608139 Phys Lett New D_s state (L=0)

18. D_s states (L=1) FC Thomas Lakhina Swanson 0608139 Phys Lett

19. New D_s states D_{sJ} (2860) FC Thomas Lakhina Swanson 0608139 Phys Lett

20. 2. things that we know we don’t know 10 (or at least havent decided yet)

21. New D_s states D_{sJ} (2860) Why Ds0 and Ds1 lower than V(r)? 11 Three ideas…..

22. (also M.Nowak et al, HADRON2003) 2560 1+ 243MeV D*K DK DK and D*K molecules? cs* shift down by D(*)K potential Barnes FC Lipkin PRD68 054006 2003 12

23. (also M.Nowak et al, HADRON2003) Why in cs*? Which 1+? 2560 1+ 243MeV 25 Gap? 12

24. D_{sJ} (2860) cs* model data cs* alpha^2/DK Lakhina Swanson ph/0608011 12 …or is it V(r) at order \alpha_s^2?

25. D_{sJ} (2860) FC Thomas Lakhina Swanson 0608139 Phys Lett Test: B decays If new Ds states are indeed1P and 2P cs* (2860)D (2860)D* (2317)D (2317)D* =0.6-1.8 =0.3-0.9 12

26. 3. things that we didn’t really know … but do now (maybe) 12 How hadrons decay

27. flux-tube breaking and decays c.m. e.g. p=1 Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed e.g. 1-+ pi + (^1P_1) or (^3P_1) Isgur Paton 92 light exotics FC Page 95 all This is model. What is reality?

28.  confirms Flux Tube for hybrid:conventional Exactly WHAT is Lattice revealing about dynamics: What aspect(s) of Flux Tube model are being confirmed? Lattice S-wave decays now calculated Michael McNeile Michael McNeile 06 FC Burns 06

29.  confirms Flux Tube for hybrid:conventional Exactly WHAT is Lattice revealing about dynamics: What aspect(s) of Flux Tube model are being confirmed? Lattice S-wave decays now calculated Michael McNeile Michael McNeile 06 FC Burns 06 13

30. J – S = “L”Factorisation of S and L qq* created in S=1 14

31. J – S = “L”Factorisation of S and L qq* created in S=1 14

32. 2 qq* create in S=1 qq* create in S=0 0

33. Burns Close Thomas qq* created in S=1; S L factorize Explains Ackleh Barnes Swanson observation: a1 rho pi: b1 omega pi S/D ratios = -2 Psi* decays to D*D_2: no polarisation 2 Psi chi_0:1:2 pattern cannot be this; OgE?? Burns Close Thomas arXiv:0709.1816 15

34. Burns Close Thomas arXiv:0709.1816 qq* created in S=1; S L factorize Explains Ackleh Barnes Swanson observation: a1 rho pi: b1 omega pi S/D ratios = -2 Psi* decays to D*D_2: no polarisation 2 Psi chi_0:1:2 pattern cannot be this; OgE?? Determine nature of Y(4260) by DD_1 pattern Burns FC Thomas arXiv:0709.1816

35. SL Factorisation and S=1  selection rules for psi*(cc*) \to DD_1 Burns Close Thomas arXiv:0709.1816 15

36. 4. things that we thought we didn’t know, but maybe knew more than we realised … weird charmonium 16

37. 1++(3872) 1--(4260) JPC?(4460) I=1 !? 16

38. 1++(3872) 1--(4260) JPC?(4460) I=1 !? DD* 16

39. 1++(3872) 1--(4260) JPC?(4460) I=1 !? DD* DD1/D*D0 16

40. 1++(3872) 1--(4260) JPC?(4460) I=1 !? DD* DD1/D*D0 D*D1 17

41. 1++(3872) 1--(4260) JPC?(4460) I=1 !? DD* DD1 D*D1 DD1/D*D0 17

42. 1++(3872) 1--(4260) JPC?(4460) I=1 !? DD* DD1 D*D1 Are they S-wave cusps; or S-attractive cc*qq*… driven by cc* states (but not I=1 cc* !) Pi psi* What about Pi psi?? 17

43. DD* (neutral) threshold Psi rho; psi omega S-wave 1++ mesons D D* psi uu* vector D D* D pi Q exch (Swanson) not enough Maybe…Thomas Pi exchange drives attraction 43 Tornqvist 1993 1++(3872)

44. S-wave 1- - (1-+ !) D D1 D* D0 pi Pi exchange drives attraction FC Thomas Zhao 2007 1--(4260) 18

45. S-wave 1- - (1-+ !) D1 D* psi pi D D1 D* D0 pi Q exch gives cc* + pi… final states Verify JPC seek other final states Other places should occur… Pi exchange drives attraction FC Thomas Zhao 2007 S -wave 0- (I=0 and I=1) also 1- 2- D* D1 D* D1 pi 1--(4260) JPC?(4460) I=1 !?

46. 5. things that we know should exist, but we dont know how to prove them … Hybrid charmonium 20

47. flux-tube degrees-of-freedom c.m. e.g. p=1 Costs about 1 to 1.5GeV energy to excite phonon “pi/R” Hybrid qq* @ 2GeV; Hybrid cc* @ 4-4.5GeV Barnes FC Swanson 93 20

48. \sim 2.2 GeV ss* quarks LGT \sim 2 GeV ud flavours Michael…

49. Predicted 1-+ Hybrid masses (with spin splittings) Spin hyperfine splittings 1- - (4.25) Y(4260?) 1- + (4.1) HQLGT 0- + (3.95) X(3940?) Barnes FC 82 Chanowitz Sharpe 24

50. Predicted 1-+ Hybrid masses (with spin splittings) Spin hyperfine splittings 1- - (4.25) Y(4260?) 1- + (4.1) HQLGT 0- + (3.95) X(3940?) Barnes FC 82 Chanowitz Sharpe e+e- feebly coupled e+e- \to \psi + X?

51. Belle e+e- to + X ??? 0-+;1-+ 31

52. Belle e+e- to + X ??? 0-+;1-+ 31 No 3872

53. Claim of Hybrid Charmonium by BELLE 0-+;1-+ Statistics resolve if 0,1,2 structures and J^PC

54. e+e- \to psi pi pi BaBar sees new vector cc* Y(4260) No sign of established 3S/2D(4040/4160) 4S(4400) in the psi pipi data Y(4260) thus seems anomalous Also no place for extra cc* state \Gamma(ee) 5-80eV Compare \sim 1 keV !! But width 90MeV dominantly psi pipi !

55. Masses OK. Need to go Beyond spectroscopy: Hybrid decays and production. 27

56. flux-tube breaking and hybrid decays c.m. e.g. p=1 Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed Isgur Paton 92 light exotics FC Page 95 all 28

57. flux-tube breaking and hybrid decays c.m. e.g. p=1 Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed e.g. 1-+ pi + (^1P_1) or (^3P_1) Isgur Paton 92 light exotics FC Page 95 all S+S = 0 for hybrid charmonium (FC + Page predictions 1995) Look for DD_{0,1} near threshold ; absence of DD or D*D* and of DsDs or Ds*Ds* \psi f_0; \psi pipi; \chi \eta; h_c \eta also

58. All consistent with predictions for hybrid charmonium FC+Page 1995

59. The large psi +pi pi D D_1 uu * pi pi psi e+e- psi(hybrid) DD_1 S-wave, relative mom \sim 0; DD_1 interchange constituents to make psi pipi “strongly” (c.f. Swanson model of 3872 DD* \to psi omega) 30

60. flux-tube breaking and hybrid decays c.m. e.g. p=1 Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed e.g. 1-+ pi + (^1P_1) or (^3P_1) Isgur Paton 92 light exotics FC Page 95 all S+S = 0 for hybrid charmonium (FC + Page predictions 1995) Look for DD_{0,1} near threshold ; absence of DD or D*D* and of DsDs or Ds*Ds* \psi f_0; \psi pipi; \chi \eta; h_c \eta also

61. flux-tube breaking and hybrid decays c.m. e.g. p=1 Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed e.g. 1-+ pi + (^1P_1) or (^3P_1) Isgur Paton 92 light exotics FC Page 95 all S+S = 0 for hybrid charmonium (FC + Page predictions 1995) Look for DD_{0,1} near threshold ; absence of DD or D*D* and of DsDs or Ds*Ds* \psi f_0; \psi pipi; \chi \eta; h_c \eta also

62. This is a clear distinction with hybrid for which this is ~ zero

63. Y(4260): D_s and D_s* channels

65. No DsDs resonance Disfavours tetraquark csc*s* 33

66. flux-tube breaking and hybrid decays c.m. e.g. p=1 Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed e.g. 1-+ pi + (^1P_1) or (^3P_1) Isgur Paton 92 light exotics FC Page 95 all S+S = 0 for hybrid charmonium (FC + Page predictions 1995) Look for DD_{0,1} near threshold ; absence of DD or D*D* and of DsDs or Ds*Ds* \psi f_0; \psi pipi; \chi \eta; h_c \eta also

67. Y(4260): D and D* channels

68. No DD DD* or D*D* resonance

69. e+e- KK_1 phipi Intriguing resonant signal at 2175 = phi(hybrid)?? 2175 – m(phi) = 4265 – m(psi) !!?? 36

71. Y(4260) Three Possibilities Maiani et al FC Page DD_1 and not DsDs for hybrid DsDs and not DD_1 for tetraquark Experiment can decide Y(4260) = S wave effect intriguing

72. Y(4260) Three Possibilities Maiani Close DD_1 and not DsDs for hybrid DsDs and not DD_1 for tetraquark Experiment can decide Y(4260) = S wave effect My worry Search DD_1 and D*D_0 in DD\pi\pi DD_1 and not DsDs for hybrid 37

73. Y(4260) Three Possibilities Maiani Close DD_1 and not DsDs for hybrid DsDs and not DD_1 for tetraquark Experiment can decide Y(4260) = S wave effect My worry If NOT hybrid cc* then why not/where is it ?!

74. SL Factorisation and S=1  selection rules for psi* \to DD_1 Burns FC Thomas arXiv:0709.1816

75. end

76. Is it an S wave attraction? e+e- DD_1 is first S-wave charm threshold and occurs \sim 4.2 GeV ! D* D0 pi Pi exchange drives attraction 1- - isoscalar: like 4260 1– + isovector: doubly exotic! D D1 43

77. Is it really a resonance? D D_1 uu * pi pi psi e+e- DD_1 is first S-wave charm threshold and occurs \sim 4.2 GeV ! S-wave, relative mom \sim 0; DD_1 interchange constituents to make psi pipi “strongly” (c.f. Swanson model of 3872 DD* \to psi omega) e+e- Ds Ds_1 psi KK should show similar

80. S=1 qq* pair creation triggers decays Production of: qq* + qq* Hybrid + qq* Hybrid + Hybrid + algebraic 6j 9j factorisation e+e- \to psi + (0-+ or 1-+)Hyb =0 Not hybrid ! But……OgE prodn??! Burns FC 07

81. flux-tube breaking and hybrid decays c.m. e.g. p=1 Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed e.g. 1-+ pi + (^1P_1) or (^3P_1) Isgur Paton 92 light exotics FC Page 95 all S+S = 0 for hybrid charmonium (FC + Page predictions 1995) Look for DD_{0,1} near threshold ; absence of DD or D*D* and of DsDs or Ds*Ds* \psi f_0; \psi pipi; \chi \eta; h_c \eta also

84. D D* psi uu* vector D D* D pi Q exch not enough Pi exchange drives attraction 1++(3872)

85. Belle e+e- to + X ??? 19

86. Belle Inconsistent strengths? big ? radial ?? thresholds and1+ 2+? 20

87. Claim of Hybrid Charmonium at 3940 by BELLE in B decays Is this the same as X(3940)? Is it hybrid charmonium as claimed? ….

88. e+e- \to psi pi pi BaBar sees new vector cc* Y(4260) 22

89. Y(4260) = S-wave threshold attraction Y(4260) Three Possibilities Experimental distinctions 23

90. 2S: 1- 1S: 1- 1D: 1- 2+ 1+ 0+ 3686 3097 3415 3510 3556 3772  cc*) 2980 1S: 0- 3625 2S: 0-

91. Unusual New Charmonium NameMass (MeV) Width (MeV) comments X(3872) 3871.9  0.6 narrowJ/ , D pair X(3940) 3943  6  6 <52Recoil mass  J/  not seen Y(3940) 3943  11  1387  22  26  J/  Y(4260) 4259  8  2 6 88  23  6 4 J/    , D pair not seen Z(3930) 3931  4  2 20  8  3 D pair What is it? 1 ++,DD*  c (3S) ? hybrid? 1 --, hybrid?  ’ c2 ? hybrid? 24 One state or two? D*0D*0 cc*uu* and (?) D*+D*- cc*dd*

92. Test: produce in B+ > B0 X \to K+K-\pi>> K0K0\pi CLEOc/BES precision test for 1++ 3550 also DD* molecule “tetraquark” Mass = neutral threshold to better than 1 in 10,000 CLEO-c: BE=0.6 \pm 0.6MeV cuc*u* S-wave J PC = 1 ++ isospin maximally broken 25

93. Is it an S wave attraction? e+e- DD_1 is first S-wave charm threshold and occurs \sim 4.2 GeV ! 42