1 / 58

The meson landscape

Charmed states. “Diquarks,Tetraquarks, Pentaquarks and no quarks”. The meson landscape. Scalars and Glue in Strong QCD. New states beyond. Weird baryons: pentaquark problems. Old and New. 1. Old D_s states. cs* model data.

caron
Download Presentation

The meson landscape

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Charmed states “Diquarks,Tetraquarks, Pentaquarks and no quarks” The meson landscape Scalars and Glue in Strong QCD New states beyond Weird baryons: pentaquark problems Old and New 1

  2. Old D_s states cs* model data FC Swanson PRD72 094004 2005

  3. Old D_s states cs* model data D(*)K thresholds Barnes FC Lipkin PRD68 054006 2003

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

  5. D*K DK

  6. 25 Why in cs*? (also M.Nowak et al, HADRON2003) 2560 1+ 243MeV Which 1+?

  7. New D_s states ?extra 0+ 1+ or just these?

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

  9. New D_s states D_{sJ} (2860) Test: B decays If 2P and 1P cs* FC Thomas Lakhina Swanson 0608139 Phys Lett

  10. Understanding requires sorting out D and compare Ds

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

  12. ??? e+e- to + X Belle

  13. Inconsistent strengths? Belle and1+ ? radial ?? thresholds big ?

  14. New Charmonium hybrid?

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

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

  17. Y(4260) Three Possibilities Y(4260) = S-wave threshold attraction Experimental distinctions….later this talk

  18. New Charmonium hybrid?

  19. Charmonium Tetraquark:1++cc* X(3872)

  20. X(3872) mass compared with DD* thresholds DD* molecule “tetraquark” Mass = neutral threshold to better than 1 in 10,000 cuc*u* S-wave JPC = 1++ isospin maximally broken

  21. Close+Page Tornqvist Swanson

  22. 18 cc*1++ 3550; 1++* 3950: P-wave cc* DD* (neutral) threshold Psi rho; psi omega Mass coincidence only happens with Charm, not strange or bottom S-wave 1++ mesons Energy degeneracy Psi rho:psi omega \sim 1 Specific model: Swanson (Recall for Y(4260) later) psi D D* uu* vector D* D pi D* D

  23. DD* (neutral) threshold Psi rho; psi omega S-wave 1++ mesons psi D Q exch not enough D* uu* vector D* D Pi exchange drives attraction pi D* D

  24. An extra narrow charmonium state Current opinion: 1++ cc* with large tetraquark cc*uu* admixture: Test: produce in B+ > B0 X \to K+K-\pi>> K0K0\pi CLEOc/BES precision test for 1++ 3550 also

  25. New Charmonium hybrid?

  26. New states outside the quark model:Gluonic Hybrid Mesons 40

  27. Lattice Linear Potential Linear flux tube model Isgur Linear flux tube (lattice) Bali…

  28. e.g. p=1 c.m. Gluonic hybrid mesons UKQCD Exciting the flux tube Lattice and model agree spectrum; decays in FT, new = lattice

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

  30. e.g. p=1 c.m. flux-tube degrees-of-freedom Costs about 1 to 1.5GeV energy to excite phonon “pi/R” Hybrid qq* @ 2GeV; Hybrid cc* @ 4-4.5GeV Barnes FC Swanson 93 Ted Barnes (Soton) FC (RL); mass/splitting; light exotic 1-+

  31. \sim 2.2 GeV ss* quarks LGT \sim 2 GeV ud flavours LGT: Michael… Spin hyperfine splittings pattern 2-+ 1- - 1- + HQLGT 0- + Barnes FC 82 Chanowitz Sharpe

  32. Predicted 1-+ Hybrid masses (without spin splittings)

  33. 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

  34. 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?

  35. e+e- to + X Belle ??? 0-+;1-+

  36. Belle Y(3940) claimed “hybrid charmonium” ….but seems also to be in DD* (need to measure b.r)….

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

  38. e+e- \to psi pi pi BaBar sees new vector cc* 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 !! Y(4260) But width 90MeV dominantly psi pipi !

  39. 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?

  40. Masses OK. Need to goBeyond spectroscopy:Hybrid decays and production.+ new insights from Lattice QCD 30

  41. e.g. p=1 c.m. flux-tube breaking and decays Isgur Paton 92 light exotics FC Page 95 all Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed e.g. 1-+ pi + (^1P_1) or (^3P_1) Michael McNeile 06 FC Burns 06

  42. e.g. p=1 c.m. flux-tube breaking and decays Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed S+S = 0 for hybrid charmonium (FC + Page predictions 1995) Look for DD_{0,1}; a bit of DD* and absence of DD or D*D* and of DsDs or Ds*Ds* \psi f_0; \psi pipi; \chi \eta; h_c \eta also

  43. The large psi +pi pi 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) psi D D_1 uu * pi pi

  44. f0(980)?

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

  46. e+e- KK_1 Future need to do: Compare this with the DD_1 / psi pipi case: M(pipi); phi (psi) polarisation phi pi pi

  47. Intriguing resonant signal at 2190 = phi(hybrid)?? e+e- KK_1 2190 – m(phi) = 4265 – m(psi) !!?? phi pi pi

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

More Related