Exotica and Charmonia @ CLEO 1) A short reminder about cc -> exotica 2) Spectrum, higher charmonia...

Exotica and Charmonia Exotica and Charmonia @ @ CLEOCLEO

1)1) A short reminder about cA short reminder about ccc -> exotica -> exotica

2)2) Spectrum, higher charmoniaSpectrum, higher charmonia

3)3) Strong decays (main topic)Strong decays (main topic)

4)4) EM decays (in paper – tiny bit here)EM decays (in paper – tiny bit here)

5)5) L’oops (F.Y.A.)L’oops (F.Y.A.)

Ted BarnesPhysics Div. ORNLDept. of Physics, U.Tenn.

CLEO seminar6 May 2005

2)-4) abstracted from T.Barnes, S.Godfrey and E.S.Swanson, hep-ph/0505002:All 40 cc states expected to 4.42 GeV, all 139 of their open flavor strong modes and partial widths, all 231 o.f. strong decay amplitudes, all 153 E1 and (some) M1 EM widths. Phew.

The canonical, ca. 1980 method to search for glueballs.

Expected J PC = 0, 0, 2.

Found some qq states plus the previously unknown

and .

Latter is now the f scalar glueball candidate.

C = 1

C =

But first,a short reminder…

1

1

C =

A 2nd, sometimes better approach for exotica searches.

“Flavor-tagging” J/ hadronic decays. (mid-late 1980s, after J/ radiative.)

You can access the same states but also see what flavors they preferentially couple to. (Need not be J/’are also interesting.)

Flavor-tagging J/ V f hadronic decays, an e.g.: f = K+K-

Against , you see the f0(1710).

No f2’(1525) (ss).

Against , you see the f2’(1525) (ss).

Weak f0(1710) shoulder claimed.

Against you see both.No nn / ss flavor discrimination.

J.J.Becker et al. (MarkIII)SLAC-PUB-4243 (Feb.1987)

DEAR CLEO, PLEASE DON’T FORGET:

The usual mixed-flavor

J/ f

Flavor tagged

J/ f

Flavor tagged

J/ f

Higher CharmoniaHigher Charmonia

2. Spectrum

Charmonium (cc)A nice example of a QQ spectrum.

Expt. states (blue) are shown with the usual L classification.

Above 3.73 GeV:Open charm strong decays(DD, DD* …):broader statesexcept 1D

2 22

3.73 GeV

Below 3.73 GeV: Annihilation and EM decays.

, KK* , cc, , ll..):narrow states.

s = 0.5538

b = 0.1422 [GeV2]m

c = 1.4834 [GeV]

= 1.0222 [GeV]

Fitted and predicted cc spectrumCoulomb (OGE) + linear scalar conft. potential

model blue = expt, red = theory.

S*S OGE

L*S OGE – L*S conft, T OGE

1P -> 1S3P

2 3S

1 424 [keV]

3P1 3S

1 314 [keV]

3P0 3S

1 152 [keV]

1P1 1S

0 498 [keV]

426(51) [keV]288(48) [keV]119(19) [keV] -

E1 Radiative Partial Widths

2S -> 1P

23S1 3P

2 38 [keV]

23S1 3P

1 54 [keV]

23S1 3P

0 63 [keV]

21S0 1P

1 49 [keV]

18(2) [keV]24(2) [keV]24(2) [keV] -

Same model, wfns. and params as the cc spectrum. Standard |<

f | r |

i >|2 E1 decay rate formula.

Expt. rad. decay rates from PDG 2002

Fitted and predicted cc spectrumCoulomb (OGE) + linear scalar conft. potential

model Left = NR model, right = GI model..

S*S OGE

2P

1F

cc from LGT

exotic cc-H at 4.4 GeV

cc has returned.

Small L=2 hfs.

A LGT e.g.: X.Liao and T.Manke, hep-lat/0210030 (quenched – no decay loops)Broadly consistent with the cc potential model spectrum. No radiative or strong decay predictions yet.

3. Strong decays (open flavor)

R and the 4 higher 1-- states

3770

4040

4160

4415

(plot from Yi-Fang Wang’s online BES talk, 16 Sept 2002)

Experimental R summary (2003 PDG)Very interesting open experimental question:Do strong decays use the 3P

0 model decay mechanism

or the Cornell model decay mechanism or … ?

br

vector confinement??? controversial

ee, hence 1 cc states only.

How do open-flavor strong decays happen at the QCD (q-g) level?

“Cornell” decay model:

(1980s cc papers)(cc) (cn)(nc) coupling from qq pair production by linear confining interaction.

Absolute norm of is fixed!

The 3P0 decay model: qq pair production with vacuum quantum numbers.

L I = g

A standard for light hadron decays. It works for D/S in b1 .

The relation to QCD is obscure.

What are the total widths of cc states above 3.73 GeV?

(These are dominated by open-flavor decays.)

< 2.3 MeV

23.6(2.7) MeV

52(10) MeV

43(15) MeV

78(20) MeV

PDG values

X(3872)

Strong Widths: 3P0 Decay Model

1D

3D3

0.5 [MeV]

3D2

-

3D1

43 [MeV]

1D2

-

DD 23.6(2.7) [MeV]

Parameters are = 0.4 (from light meson decays), meson masses and wfns.

X(3872)


1D -> 1P

3D3 3P

2 272 [keV]

3D2 3P

2 64 [keV]

3P1

307 [keV]

3D1 3P

2 5 [keV]

3P1

125 [keV]

3P0

403 [keV]

1D2 1P

1 339 [keV]

X(3872)


1F3F

4 8.3 [MeV]

3F3

84 [MeV]

3F2

161 [MeV]

1F3

61 [MeV]

DDDD*D*D*D

sD

s

X(3872)


1F -> 1D

3F4 3D

3 332 [keV]

3F3 3D

3 41 [keV]

3D2

354 [keV]

3F2 3D

3 2 [keV]

3D2

62 [keV]

3D

1 475 [keV]

1F3 1D

2 387 [keV]


33S1

74 [MeV]

31S0

80 [MeV]

3S

DDDD*D*D*D

sD

s

X(3872)

52(10) MeV

After restoring this “p3 phase space factor”, the BFs are:

D0D0 : D0D*0 : D*0D*0

partial widths [MeV](3P

0 decay model):

DD = 0.1 DD* = 32.9 D*D* = 33.4 [multiamp. mode]D

sD

s = 7.8

Theor R from the Cornell model.Eichten et al, PRD21, 203 (1980): 4040

DD

DD*

D*D*

4159

4415

famous nodal suppression of a 33S

1 (4040) cc DD

D*D* amplitudes(3P

0 decay model):

1P1 = 0.034

5P1 = 0.151 = 1P

1

5F1

= 0

std. cc and D meson SHO wfn. length scale


3S -> 2P 33S1 23P

2 14 [keV]

33S1 23P

1 39 [keV]

33S1 23P

0 54 [keV]

31S0 21P

1 105 [keV]

3S -> 1P 33S1 3P

2 0.7 [keV]

33S1 3P

1 0.5 [keV]

33S1 3P

0 0.3 [keV]

31S0 1P

1 9.1 [keV]


2P23P

2 80 [MeV]

23P1

165 [MeV]

23P0

30 [MeV]

21P1

87 [MeV]

DDDD*D

sD

s


2D 23D3

148 [MeV]

23D2

92 [MeV]

23D1

74 [MeV]

21D2

111 [MeV]

DDDD*D*D*D

sD

s

DsD

s*

78(20) [MeV]

std. cc SHO wfn. length scale

D*D* amplitudes:(3P

0 decay model):

1P1 = 0.049

5P1 = 0.022 1P

1

5F1 = 0.085


0 decay model):

DD = 16.3 DD* = 0.4 D*D* = 35.3 [multiamp. mode]D

sD

s = 8.0

DsD

s* = 14.1


DD

DD*

D*D*


2D -> 1P23D

3 3P

2 29 [keV]

23D2 3P

2 7 [keV]

3P1

26 [keV]

23D1 3P

2 1 [keV]

3P1

14 [keV]

3P0

27 [keV]

21D2 1P

1 40 [keV]

2D -> 1F

23D3 3F

4 66 [keV]

3F3

5

[keV] 3F

2 14

[keV]

23D2 3F

3 44 [keV]

3F2

6 [keV]

23D1 3F

2 51 [keV]

21D2 1F

3 54 [keV]

2D -> 2P23D

3 23P

2 239 [keV]

23D2 23P

2 52 [keV]

23P1

298 [keV]

23D1 23P

2 6 [keV]

23P1

168 [keV]

23P0

483 [keV]

21D2 21P

1 336 [keV]


4S 43S1

78 [MeV]

41S0

61 [MeV]

DDDD*D*D*DD

0*

DD1

DD1’

DD2*

D*D0*

DsD

s

DsD

s*

Ds*D

s*

DsD

s0*

43(15) [MeV]


DD

DD*

D*D*

4159

4415

DD1 amplitudes:

(3P0 decay model):

3S1 = 0 !!! (HQET)

3D1 = + 0.093


0 decay model):

DD = 0.4 DD* = 2.3 D*D* = 15.8 [multiamp.]

New mode calculations:

DD1 = 30.6 [m] MAIN MODE!!!

DD1’ = 1.0 [m]

DD2* = 23.1

D*D0* = 0.0

DsD

s = 1.3

DsD

s* = 2.6

Ds*D

s* = 0.7 [m]

An “industrial application” of the (4415).

Sit “slightly upstream”, at ca. 4435 MeV, and you should have a copious source of D*

s0(2317). (Assuming it is largely cs 3P

0.)

5. L’oops

Future: “Unquenching the quark model”

Virtual meson decay loop effects,qq <-> M

1 M

2 mixing.

DsJ

* states (mixed cs <-> DK …, how large is the mixing?)

Are the states close to |cs> or |DK>, or are both basis states important?

A perennial question: accuracy of the valence approximation in QCD.

Also LGT-relevant (they are usually quenched too).

|DsJ

*+(2317,2457)> = DK molecules?

T.Barnes, F.E.Close and H.J.Lipkin, hep-ph/0305025, PRD68, 054006 (2003).

3. reality

Reminiscent of Weinstein and Isgur’s “KK molecules”.

(loop effects now being evaluated)

S.Godfrey and R.Kokoski,PRD43, 1679 (1991).

Decays of S- and P-wave D Ds B and Bs flavor mesons.

3P0 “flux tube” decay model.

The L=1 0+ and 1+ cs “Ds” mesons are predicted to Have rather large total widths, 140 - 990 MeV. (= broad tounobservably broad).

Charmed meson decays (God91)

How large are decay loop mixing effects?

JP = 1+ (2457 channel)

JP = 0+ (2317 channel)

The 0+ and 1+ channels are predicted to have very largeDK and D*K decay couplings.This supports the picture of strongly mixed

|DsJ

*+(2317,2457)> = |cs> + |(cn)(ns)> states.

Evaluation of mixing in progress. Initial estimates for cc …

L’oops evaluated

[ J/ - M1M

2 - J/

3P0 decay model,

std. params. and SHO wfns.

M1M

2 M [J/] P

M1M

2 [J/]

DD

- 30. MeV 0.027

DD*

- 108. MeV 0.086

D*D*

- 173. MeV 0.123

DsD

s - 17. MeV 0.012

DsD

s*

- 60. MeV 0.041

Ds*D

s*

- 97. MeV 0.060

famous 1 : 4 : 7 ratio DD : DD* : D*D*

Sum = - 485. MeV Pcc

= 65.% VERY LARGE mass shift and large non-cc component!

Can the QM really accommodate such large mass shifts??? Other “cc” states?

1/2 : 2 : 7/2 DsD

s : D

sD

s* : D

s*D

s*

L’oops

[ cc - M1M

2 - cc

3P0 decay model,

std. params. and SHO wfns.

Init.

Sum M P

cc

J/ - 485. MeV 0.65

c - 447. MeV 0.71

2 - 537. MeV 0.43

1

- 511. MeV 0.46

0- 471. MeV

0.53 hc

- 516. MeV 0.46

Aha? The large mass shifts are all similar; the relative shifts are “moderate”.

Continuum components are large; transitions (e.g. E1 radiative) will have to berecalculated, including transitions within the continuum.

Apparently we CAN expect DsJ

-sized (100 MeV) relative mass shifts due to decay

loops in extreme cases. cs system to be considered. Beware quenched LGT!

1) Please don’t forget J/ (or other cc) flavor-tagging hadronic decays!

May be better than J/-rad for producing exotica.

2) Spectrum

The known states agree well with a cc potential model, except: small multiplet splittings

for L.ge.2 imply that the X(3872) is implausible as a “naive” cc state.

3) Strong decays (main topic)

Some cc states above 3.73 GeV are expected to be rather narrow (in addition to 2- states),

notably 3D3 and 3F4. Of the known states, (4040),(4159) and (4415) all have

interesting decay modes: 1st 2, D*D* relative amps, and for (4415) we predict DD1

dominance; also a D*s0

(2317) source.

4) L’oops

Virtual meson decay loops cause LARGE mass shifts and cc <-> M1M2 mixing.

(Perhaps explaining the D*sJ masses?) These effects are under investigation.

Exotica and Charmonia @ CLEO 1) A short reminder about cc -> exotica 2) Spectrum, higher charmonia...

Documents

Transcript of Exotica and Charmonia @ CLEO 1) A short reminder about cc -> exotica 2) Spectrum, higher charmonia...