A.I. SandaNagoya University
Nagoya Japan
FPCP2004Daegu, KOREA
A partial list of things that interested me
1
1
sin 2 0.728 0.056 0.023 Belle
sin 2 0.722 0.040 0.023 Babar
Very impressiveIt will get even better!
ψKS asymmetry
KM mechanism is correct description of CP violation at low energies!
Dramatic sign flip in sin2Φ1 with new VD at Belle. While ΨKS value for sin2Φ1 is stable with bo
th VD, Monte-Carlo studies supports that there nothing wrong, it is hard for me to understand. ( I look forward to Hazumi’s talk. I hope we can be convinced.)
A partial list of things that interested me p.1
Φ KS asymmetry
Belle( ) ( )
cos sin( ) ( )
t t
A Mt S Mtt t
Milky Way
A partial list of things that interested me p.2
Why are these different?
Very useful for NP searches
As for CPV, my gut feeling is that it must be there!
( 0.13 0.60 0.56)% Belle
N NN N
Same sign dilepton CP asymmetry
Belle+Babar
( ) ( )0.113 0.019
( ) ( )
B K B K
B K B K
0 0
0 0
( ) ( )0.04 0.04
( ) ( )
B K B K
B K B K
B→Kπ CP asymmetries
obviously Belle data must come within the circle
ππ CP asymmetries
pQCD predicted itWith correct sign! Keum, Li, AIS
Babar New!
A partial list of things that interested me p.3
Lyra
Altair
July 7
0.170.160.43 0.51 BelleAsym
A partial list of things that interested me p.4
Good news for isospin analysis
CP violation should be here too!
Looks promising!
Ways to unfold 4 fold ambiguities.
0 0 -6
0 0 0.44 0.22 -60.48 0.18
( ) (1.17 0.32 0.10) 10 Babar
( ) (2.32 ) 10 Belle
Br B
Br B
Observation of B→π0 π0
3*
0
+
*+
0
i
cb us
ub cs
B D K K
B D K K e
V V
V V
Observation of B→DK
Φ3
A partial list of things that interested me p.5
B→VV polarization measurmentsMust for the new physics searches
0 0 0 0
Naive prediction
+10% K KC A
*B K
B→π0KS CP asymmetry
A partial list of things that interested me p.6
Indication of things to expect in the future!
A partial list of things that interested me p. 8
Belle
A partial list of things that interested me p. 9
Not just limits. A quest for the discovery!
Foreword: kaons again?In spite of a long history the K system is still a laboratory for the flavour physics, an interferometry system, a repository of all kinds of CP violation and can be a sensitive probe for NP.. Then:
YES, kaons again!
Vincenzo Patera*LNF/INFN
1030.189.0 1047.1)(
KBr
A partial list of things that interested me p.10
He does not need to apologizeIt is a good sign for FP thatK physics continues after 57 years!
KL0@E391a:Run I (2004)Expected
sensitivity
by Run I:
4÷9x10-10
Results from Run I in fall 2004
Requesting Run II in 2005
*11
2
4
3.2
110 10)5.06.2(10
Im
166
)(1048.1)(
ttt
SML GeV
mmKBR
A dream for a theorist, a
nightmare for an experimentalist. All
neutral, 2/3 invisible final state:
“Nothing to nothing”
A partial list of things that interested me p.11
( , )
*
*ud ub
ucd cb
V VV V
132
*
*td tb
tcd cb
V VV V
(1,0)
SLAC notationIn honor of Bjorken
Fermilab workshop 1988
Correct a mistake in the CKM fitter figure
This solution is not allowed by ΨKS asymmetry!
AIS WIN2002, I.I. Bigi and AIS, to appear
Notation
0 01
0 02
B p B q B
B p B q B
Mass eigenstates
1 1 11 11 12 12
2 2 11 11 12 12
2 2 2
2 2 2
i i q iM M M
p
i i q iM M M
p
Mass eigenvalues
2 1 12 122Re2
q iM M M M
p
Mass difference
* *2 12 12
12 12
* *12 12
12 12
2
2
2
2
iMq
ip M
iMq
ip M
Coefficients1 2 B B
1
1
1
2*212 12
212 12
i
ii
M M eqe
p M M e
112 12
iM M e
1 12 22 1 12 122Re 2i iM M M e M e M
1212sin Im ( ) sin 2 Im ( )
iqMt f M t e f
p
112 122Resign MM M
This way -π/2< φ1 < π/2
± cancel but we need to know the sign
*122
sin Im ( ) sin Im ( )
MqMt f Mt f
p M
2. Define △M>0 H LM M M
*122
sin Im ( ) sin Im ( )Mq
Mt f Mt fp M
1. Method which cancels △M dependence
*122Mq
p M
3. Try to cancel q/p dependence
12sin Im ( ) sin Re Im ( )q q q
Mt f M t fp p p
Discussions on the marketSign of ΔM cancel but you need to know the sign
ΔM>0, but you need to know the sign
Sign of q/p cancel but you need to know the sign
2 2( ) ((1 ) )sign M sign
-
++
-
( )sign M
1 2 2
2 (1 )sin 2
(1 )
-
+
+
-
1sin 2
-+
+-
+
+ -
- 1sin sin 2M
These are allowed region for ψKS asym>0
1 1sin 2 0, cos2 0
1 1sin 2 0, cos2 0
Excluded
.)(27.0.)(72.2)cos(2β 50.079.0 syststat
CL 86.6%at excluded
68.0
)β2(sin1)cos(2β 2
Babar
Lets assume that ΔM contains NP.ε and ΔM constraints are removed as they may contain effects of new physics
Constraint from ψKS asymmetryassume sin2φis given by exp.
ubV
c
t
u 132
KM parameters are not directly related to ψKS asymmetry
u c experimentally known
1Given all others are fixed
12iSMR e
2 ie
2iNPR e
12 212 12 12 2
iSM NP i
SM NPM
M M M R e R e
2
2
iMe
c
t
u 132
12 2 2 i i iSM NPR e R e e
1212 2SM i
SMM
M R e
12i
SMR e
2 ie2iNPR e
c
t1
2
u
12 2 2 i i iSM NPR e R e e
If Φ1 <0, RNP gets bigger
( 0.13 0.60 0.56)%
N NN N
1.0006 0.0030 0.0028qp
Belle hep-ex/0408012
4
4
1
1
SL
pqN N
AN N p
q
12
2
2
2 21
2
8
3 (1Im
)SLc
b
mA
M m
*12
c
* *12
In the limit 0,
=
u
ud u
td b
c cb
t
b d
m m
V
M
V
V
V V
V
1
12*
* *2Im Im
td tb
ud ub cd cbSL
V V V VA
M V V NP
NP will get in the way ofcancellation
1* *
*2
12
I n the limit 0,
is realtbt
ub cbud c
d
d
c u
V
m
M
V
V
V
m
V
V
1)ΨKS asymmetry sinφ
2) Φ 3 determination
230
( ) ( )1 2 cos cos
2 ( )CP CP
CP B B B
B D K B D KR r r
B D K
3
( ) ( )2 sin sin /
( ) ( )CP CP
CP B B CPCP CP
B D K B D KA r R
B D K B D K
Four fold ambiguity in Determining φ 3
Large φ3 solutionIs almost excluded
4 fold degeneracy
*
*
ub us
Ttb ts
T V Vr
P V V EW
TP
rP
T P EWP
Leave it to Yoshikawa to talk aboutThe importance of EW penguinsAnd other general analysis
2 2
32 22 sin sin
K K TCP T
K K
A AA r
A A
2 20 00
32 20 0\
32 sin sin2 sin sinK K T
CP
K
CT
K
C
A AA r r
A A
2 200 0000
2 200 0032 sin sinC
CK K
CP
K K
A AA
A Ar
0 0 0( ) ( ) ( ) 0Asym K Asym K Asym K
+- 00
00
CP aymmetry A - A
A +10%
CP CP
CP
CP violation in the decay amplitude
( ) ( )0.113 0.019
( ) ( )
B K B K
B K B K
Belle+Babar
0 0
0 0
( ) ( )0.04 0.04
( ) ( )
B K B K
B K B K
See Yoshikawa’s talk for details
A naïve analysisNeglect all r2
terms and annihilation just to illustrate a point
Cancellation?
0 0The role of C in B
2
2
2
2
0 0 0
0
0
( ) ( )
( ) (1 )
( ) (1 )
id
i
i
i
w
d
e
ew
P Ce
T TPC
eT
PA B T e
T
A B T
PA B T
T
eT
pi pi data => C/T = 0.70 e^{i 63^o}Substituting the above C/T into the K pi data, we obtain T/P = 0.16 e^{-25^o i}, P^{ew}/P = 0.26 e^{-70 ^o i} So, it is possible to accommodate all data by increasing only C.
See Yoshikawa’s talk for details
Charng and Li
ΦKS asymmetry
2 2
* * *
4
0
tb ts cb cs ub usV V V V V V
( ) ( ) S SK K
* tb tsV V
0B
d
b c
csd
SK
*cb csV V
Standard model predicts equal CP violation for these decay modes
Im( ( ))qp f
I believe that some new physics effect might be there.
But not at the level of 50%.It is probably at 1% level.
So, precision experiments are needed!
Naïve factorizationWe expect |A00 |>> |A-- |>> |A++
|
New physics must show up in B→ ΦK*
asymmetry
f A A
fL should dominate
|f00|>>|f--|>> |f++| 1
f
f
Φ
b s
s s
A. Kagan
3 possibilities
BΦ K*0 0 No spin flip
Spin filp of s quark
Spin flip of both s quarks
00LA A
A
ACP + 00LA A
A A A+
A A A-
This is a naïve argument! Non factorizable diagrams ect.
If there is NPit should appear here
I am not surprised if so called new physics effects went away! Continued search is absolutely necessary.
Don’t say 1035 , it is not enough! SUPERB with 1043 is strongly
encouraged! Many interesting physics to do for many
years to come! Lets have fun!
Top Related