Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byRosaline Walton Modified over 9 years ago
1
Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar Bryan Fulsom SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory 35 th International Conference on High Energy Physics Paris, France July 22, 2010
2
This talk: – (1D J ) (1S) – (nS) (e e ) b (1S) – (3S) h b (1P) – (3S) h b (1P) b (1S) Overview Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 2/22 BaBar: 1999-2008 122M (3S) / 100M (2S)
3
Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 2/22 This talk: – (1D J ) (1S) – (nS) (e e ) b (1S) – (3S) h b (1P) – (3S) h b (1P) b (1S) Overview BaBar: 1999-2008 122M (3S) / 100M (2S)
4
Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 2/22 This talk: – (1D J ) (1S) – (nS) (e e ) b (1S) – (3S) h b (1P) – (3S) h b (1P) b (1S) Overview BaBar: 1999-2008 122M (3S) / 100M (2S)
5
Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 2/22 This talk: – (1D J ) (1S) – (nS) (e e ) b (1S) – (3S) h b (1P) – (3S) h b (1P) b (1S) Overview BaBar: 1999-2008 122M (3S) / 100M (2S)
6
This talk: – (1D J ) (1S) – (nS) (e e ) b (1S) – (3S) h b (1P) – (3S) h b (1P) b (1S) Overview Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 2/22 BaBar: 1999-2008 122M (3S) / 100M (2S)
7
(1D J ) Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 3/22
8
Expected (1D J=1,2,3 ) properties –m (1D J ) ~10160 MeV/c 2, m (1D J ) ~5-12 MeV/c 2, (1D J ) ~30 keV Experimental observation – (3S) (1D 2? ) (1S) l l –B ( (3S) l l ) = (2.5 ± 0.5 ± 0.5) 10 -5 –m (1D 2? ) = 10161.1 ± 0.6 ± 1.6 MeV/c 2 No evidence for (1D J ) (1S) –Limit: B ( (1D J ) (1S)) < 4% –Theory: Kuang & Yan ~40%, Ko ~2%, Moxhay ~0.25% (1D J ): General Information Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 4/22
9
Reconstruct (3S) (1D J ) (1S) l l –Require exactly 4 tracks –m l l consistent with / constrained to m (1S) –Minimize E 2 to select best candidate –m (1D J ) resolution ~ 3 MeV/c 2 Maximum Likelihood fit to m l l spectrum – (1D J ) signals: Double Gaussian + Crystal Ball –Monte Carlo (MC)-determined backgrounds: (3S) bJ (2P) ( or ) (1S) (3S) (1S) + FSR (3S) ( ) (1S) (3S) / (2S) ( (1S)) (1D J ): BaBar Analysis Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 5/22
10
m (1D 2 ) = 10164.5 ± 0.8 ± 0.6 MeV/c 2 (1D J ): Fit Results Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 6/22
11
(1D J ): Quantum Numbers Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 7/22 –L: invariant mass P( 2 ) for m distribution D(84.6%), S(3.1%), P(0.3%) –J: Helicity Angle dN/d(cos ) ~ 1 + (3cos 2 -1)/2 = -1.0±0.4±0.1 consistent w. J = 2 –J P : Angle between and l l planes dN/d ~ 1 + cos(2 ), sign( ) = (-1) J P = -0.4±0.3±0.1 consistent w. J P = 2
12
Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 8/22 b (1S)
13
b (1S) observed in inclusive spectrum for (3S) and (2S) Measured properties – B ( (3,2S) b (1S)) = (5.1 ± 0.7) 10 -4 / (3.9 ± 1.5) 10 -4 –m b (1S) = 9390.9 ± 2.8 MeV/c 2, b (1S) 10 MeV –(m (1S) – m b (1S) ) = 69.3 ± 2.8 MeV/c 2 Hyperfine splitting theoretical predictions –Lattice: ~50-60 MeV/c 2 NRQCD: ~40 MeV/c 2 b (1S): General Information Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 9/22
14
Converted photons ( e e ) improve resolution (25 5 MeV) –Fit pair of tracks, selected with 2 fitter, m , –Additional cuts: |cos thrust |, N tracks, veto Simultaneous fit to E spectrum in (3S) and (2S) datasets – (3,2S) b (1S): Breit-Wigner Crystal Ball –e e E=m (nS) ISR (1S): Crystal Ball – bJ (2,1P) (1S): Doppler broadening Crystal Ball –Background: 4 th order polynomial exponential decay b (1S): Converted Photon Analysis Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 10/22
15
b (1S): Fit Results Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 11/22
16
E and branching fractions as expected Mass-constrained fit: –No evidence for b (2.3 stat.) Best fit result in m b (1S) region: –Differs by +12.4 +3.8 -4.0 MeV/c 2 (3.3 stat., 2.6 w. syst.) e e : Results Summary Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 12/22
17
Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 13/22 h b (1P)
18
Expect m h b (1P) = (m b0 (1P) +3m b1 (1P) +5m b2 (1P) ) / 9 9900 MeV/c 2 Production mechanisms –B ( (3S) h b (1P)) ~ 10 -3 – 10 -2 –B ( (3S) h b (1P)) ~ 10 -3 –R( h b (1P) / h b (1P)) = 0.05 – 20 Expected decays –h b (1P) ggg (57%), b (1S) (41%), gg (2%) Previous searches –B ( (3S) h b (1P)) < 1.8 10 -3 –B ( (3S) h b (1P)) < 2.8 10 -3 h b (1P): General Information Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 14/22
19
Reconstruct pair of oppositely charged tracks –Cuts on E total, R 2, N tracks, K S veto (flight length, cos ) Define recoil mass: m R 2 = (m (3S) – E ) 2 – P 2 2 fit to m R with 7 components –h b signal: Symmetric two-sided Crystal Ball (TCB) – (3S) (2S): Asymmetric TCB + Bifurcated Gaussian – (2S) (1S): same, with fixed feed-down components – b1,2 (2P) b1,2 (1P): TCB, with fixed peak position –K S : MC-determined phase space –Non-peaking background: 6 th order Chebychev polynomial h b (1P): Analysis Strategy Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 15/22
20
h b (1P): Fit Results Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 16/22
21
h b (1P): Fit Results Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 17/22
22
No evidence for h b signal at m h b = 9900 MeV/c 2 –B ( (3S) h b (1P)) = (0.0 ± 0.5 ± 0.3) 10 -4 (<1 10 -4 UL) Most significant scan point <2 significance Exclude B ( (3S) h b (1P)) > 2.5 10 -4 (90% CL) over range h b (1P): Fit Results Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 18/22
23
Reconstruct ( ) + –Require E consistent with h b (1P) b (1S) –Cuts on N tracks, R 2, veto (all candidates), cos h Define missing mass: m.m.( ) 2 = (m (3S) – E ) 2 – P 2 –Constrain m to improve resolution –N from m fit in each m.m.( ) bin 2 fit of m.m.( ) distribution –h b (1P) signal: Double Crystal Ball –Background: 6 th order polynomial, from reweighted MC h b (1P): Analysis Strategy Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 19/22
24
h b (1P): Fit Results Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 20/22
25
Fixed mass fit: –B ( (3S) h b (1P) b (1S)) = (3.1±1.1±0.4) 10 -4 (2.7 ) –1.5 10 -4 < B ( (3S) h b (1P) b (1S)) < 4.9 10 -4 Best fit m h b = 9903 ± 4 ± 1 MeV/c 2 consistent with predictions Combined results: –R( h b (1P) / h b (1P)) > 3.2 (>1.5 for m h b = 9903 MeV/c 2 ) h b (1P): Fit Results Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 21/22
26
(1D J ) (1S) –First observation of (1D J ) hadronic decays –Quantum numbers and precise m (1D 2 ) measurement (2,3S) converted photon spectrum –Most significant (2.6 ) “ b ” signal at 9403.3±2.4 +0.9 -1.5 MeV/c 2 –Improved and first direct bJ (1,2P) (1S) measurement h b (1P) Search –No evidence for (3S) h b (1P) –Marginal evidence (2.7 ) for (3S) h b (1P) b (1S) – B ( (3S) h b (1P)) / B ( (3S) h b (1P)) > 1 at 90% C.L. Summary Recent Bottomonium Results from BaBar / Bryan Fulsom / ICHEP / 2010.07.22 / Page 22/22
27
FIN
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.