Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Exotic Mesons from an experimental perspective S. Olsen 贵州大学 June 3 2008
2
M(MeV) J PC DD (3770) c1 c2 ’c’c cc X(3940) X(4160) X(3872) Y(3940) (4040) (4415) (4160) Y(4260) Y(4360) c0 hchc J/ ’’ c2 ’ Z + (4440) Y(4660) Placed here by J PC The XYZ Mesons can’t all be accommodated in the charmonium spectrum
3
What are they? NA Tornqvist PLB 590, 209 (2004) ES Swanson PLB 598,197 (2004) E Braaten & T Kusunoki PRD 69 074005 (2004) CY Wong PRC 69, 055202 (2004) MB Voloshin PLB 579, 316 (2004) F Close & P Page PLB 578,119 (2004) X Liu arXiv 0708..4167 … L Maiani et al PRD 71,014028 (2005) T-W Chiu & TH Hsieh PRD 73, 111503 (2006) D Ebert et al PLB 634, 214 (2006) … P Lacock et al (UKQCD) PLB 401, 308 (1997) SL Zhu PLB 625, 212 (2005) FE Close, PR Page PLB 628, 215 (2005) E Kou, O Pene PLB 631, 164 (2005) …
4
Molecules? PDG: M D0 + M D*0 = 3871.8 ± 0.4 MeV MeV M(X3872) PDG: M(X3872) = M(Z4430) Belle: M(Z4430) =4433 ± 5 MeV PDG: M D* + M D1 = 4432.6 ± 1.4 MeV Equal to 1 part in 10 -4 Coincidence?
5
arXiv: hep-ph/0308277 arXiv: 07084222 correct predictions But not 1 +
6
J P of the Z(4430)? qplqpl p l+l+ l-l- y’y’ qklqkl K l+l+ l-l- y’y’ 0-0- 1-1- J P =1 + favored, but only @ ~2s level 1+1+
7
arXiv: 0801.3540 ” ”… arXiv: 0801.1616 ” ”
8
Molecules/threshold effects should be near thresholds D S D S thresholds DD thresholds some of the states are near thresholds, but this is not a universal feature Note: there is no - or -exchange between D s states ??
9
Molecular picture may work for some XYZ states, but not all.
10
Diquark –antidiquark? u c c u d c c d d c c u u c c d These should come in isospin- & SU(3)-multiplets where are the “partner states”? X u (3872)X d (3872) X + (3872) X - (3872) Expect: Bf(B 0 K - X + )Bf(X + J/ ) Bf(B - K - X 0 )Bf(X + J/ ) ≈ 2 B + K - X u B 0 K 0 X d M(X d )-M(X u )= 2(m d -m u )/cos L Maiani et al PRD 71,014028 (20050 8 ± 3 MeV
11
B K S X & B K ± X comparison M = 0.22 ± 0.90 ± 0.27 MeV Compared to 8±3 MeV (Maiani et al PRD 71 014028) BaBar 0803.2838 K S mode K ± mode K S mode K ± mode M = 2.7 ± 1.6 ± 0.4 MeV
12
no X ± (3872) isospin partner is seen B 0 K ± p ∓ p 0 J/y B ∓ K S p ∓ p 0 J/y Bf(B 0 K - X + )Bf(X + p + p 0 J/y) Bf(B - K - X 0 )Bf(X + p + p - J/y) < 0.4 (expect 2) ??
13
None of the partner states required by the diquark-diantiquark picture have yet been seen.
14
How about cc-gluon hybrids? cc qq-gluon excitations predicted 30 yrs ago LQCD: lowest 1 -- cc-gluon mass ~4.3 GeV - QCD sum rules get lower values ~3.7 GeV relevant open charm threshold is D**D (~4.28 GeV) ( J/ ) larger than that for normal charmonium (e + e - ) for 1 -- states less than ordinary charmonium Horn & Mandula PRD 17, 898 (1977) Banner et al, PRD 56, 7039 (1997); Mei & Luo, IJMPA 18, 15713 (2003) Isgur, Koloski & Paton PRL 54, 869 (1985) McNeile, Michael & Pennanen PRD 65, 094505 (2002) Close & Page NP B443, 233 (1995) Kisslinger et al, arXiv 0805.1943 (2008) Y(4260) seems to match all of these !!!
15
DD** thresholds in & “Y(4260)” 4.26 D** spectrum M( J/ ) GeV No obvious distortions D1DD1D D2DD2D 4.7 4.5 4.3 4.1 3.9 3.7 D D D D D D DD ( ** ) thresholds
16
e + e - ’ peaks in Belle M=4324 24 MeV = 172 33 MeV 548 fb -1 X.L. Wang et al (Belle) arXiv:0707.3699 PRL 99, 142002 (2007) Two peaks! M=4664 11 ± 5 MeV = 48 15 ± 3 MeV M=4361 9 ± 9 MeV = 74 15 ± 10 MeV Earlier BaBar values (both relatively narrow) (& both above all D**D thresh) (& neither consistent with 4260) 4260 43604660
17
Y(4360) & Y(4660) are above all DD** thresholds D** spectrum 4.7 4.5 4.3 4.1 3.9 3.7 D D D D D D 4.36 4.66
18
No signs in s(e + e - D 0 Dp) Belle: G. Pakhlova et al, PRL 100, 062001 (2008)PRL 100, 062001 (2008) D 0 *(2400)D + D 2 *(2460)D 4260 4360 4660 100pb
19
s(e + e - + - J/ ) ~60pb C.Z. Yuan et al, PRL 99, 182004 (2007)PRL 99, 182004 (2007) eyeball estimate
20
s(e + e - + - ’ ) ~70pb ~40pb X.L. Wang et al, PRL 99, 142002 (2007)PRL 99, 142002 (2007) eyeball estimate
21
G(Y p + p - J/y (y ’ )) are large 10x X.H. Mo et al, PLB640, 182 (2006): G (Y4260 p + p - J/ y )> 10x G ( y 3770 p + p - J/ y ) BES: PRL 88, 101802 (2006) 4260 4360 Belle (DD + DD* + D*D* + DD p )
22
Data are in poor agreement with hybrid expectations Moreover, there are no charged charmonium hybrids, so these can’t account for the Z + (4430)
23
Are there XYZ counterparts in the ss- & bb- systems?
24
Belle: ( (5S) (nS)) 2S 3S 4S (4S) (1S) + (4S) (1S) 477 fb -1 from Belle 44±8 evts “ (5S)” (1S) 23.6 fb -1 from Belle (1/20 times the data & ~1/10 th the crosssection) 325±20 evts! 8 times as many events! Belle 0710.2577 K.F. Chen et al (Belle) PRL 100, 112001 (2008) is Huge!!!
25
Partial Widths N.B. Resonance cross section 0.302 ± 0.015 nb at 10.87 GeV PRD 98, 052001 (2007) [Belle] Cf (2S) (1S) ~ 6 keV (3S) 0.9 keV (4S) 1.8 keV Assume “ (5S)” = (5S) PDG value taken for (nS) properties >100 times bigger!!
26
p + p - (nS) Dalitz plots (1S) + (2S) +
27
It looks like there is a bb version of the Y(4260), the “Y b,” lurking around the (5S) W.-S. Hou PRD 74, 017504 (2007) Y b p + p - (nS) ( 5S ) (4S)(4S)
28
If there are bb versions of the XYZ’s, why not ss versions as well?
29
1 -- Y s states around 2 GeV? Y(2175) f 0 (980) from BaBar e+e- f 0 (980) @ Ecm ~10.6 GeV BESII M(f 0 (980) GeV M.Ablikim et al (BES) PRL 100, 102003 (2008) ss equivalent of the J/ y
30
Maybe the X(1835) is one too? M. Ablikim et al (BESII), Phys.Rev.Lett.95:262001,2005 J/ X(1835) | ’ X(1835) mostly ss
31
comments There is a new meson spectroscopy not well explained as qq states –Maybe more than one –Bodes well for BESIII, Super-B factories & PANDA Some states are narrow even though they are far above decay thresholds –e.g. Y(4660) ’ & Z + (4430) ’ have large Q but ≈50 MeV characterized by large partial widths (or Bfs) to hadrons+J/ (or ’) – Br(X(3872) J/ ) > 4.3% (Isospin=1) – (Y(3940) J/ ) > 7 MeV – (Y(4260) J/ ) > 1.6 MeV States that decay to ’ not seen decaying to J/ (and vice-versa) –Bf(Y(4660) ’) >> Bf(y(4660) J/ ) same for Y(4360) & Z(4430 ’ –Y(4260) not seen in Y(4260) ’ The new 1 -- states are not apparent in the e + e - D ( * ) D ( * ) cross sections There are no evident changes at the D**D mass threshold None of the existing ideas for non-qq mesons, i.e. molecules, di-quarks & hybrids, provide a natural explanation for the observed properties.
32
Not all candidate states are close to thresholds. None of the expected Ispin- or SU(3) partners are seen No influence from DD** threshold observed No possibility to accommodate the Z + (4430) Candidate models
33
Implications for BES-III Search for charmonium-like states decaying to h c mesons so far only J/ y & y ’ final states have been studied At BES-III we have the possibility of clean h c signals
34
For example: arXiv: 0805.4460 (last week) Accessible at BES-III?
35
Implications for BES-III Search for charmonium-like states decaying to h c mesons so far only J/ y & y ’ final states have been studied At BES-III we have the possibility of clean h c signals Measure “open strangeness” decay modes for X(1835), Y(2175), etc hybrid models say K 1 (1270)K &/or K 1 (1400)K should dominate Systematic studies of final states including a f or an h ’ need to find patterns
36
Example: p + p - h ’ spectrum with 58M J/ y ’s M( ’ ) GeV/c 2 2 yrs @ BESII X(1835) 2.5 days @ BES-III M( ’ ) GeV/c 2
37
final comments
38
1963 Elementary particle “zoo” mesons baryons +…
39
One good idea baryons sususdsd dsdsusus dududuudud mesons etc. Gell-Mann Zweig
40
2008: a new “zoo” X(1835) Y(4360) Y(4660) Z + (4430) Y(2175) Y(3940) X(3940) Y(4260) X(4160) We need a new idea
41
There is lots still to be learned about hadronic physics. BES-III is well positioned in time & energy to contribute. There are big challenges (& opportunities) for theorists. Summary
42
My advice to theorists present: Think out of the box. 加油
43
謝謝
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.