1 / 52

Tau-charm physics at B factories

Tau-charm physics at B factories. Stephen L. Olsen, Univ of Hawai’i Chinas workshop-2006 June 11-18, Beijing. 馬 鵬. BaBar and Belle. e + (3.5 GeV/c). e - (8 GeV/c). Peak luminosity 1.08 10 34 cm –2 s –1 Integrated luminosity 363 fb –1. Peak luminosity 1.62 10 34 cm –2 s –1

katoka
Download Presentation

Tau-charm physics at B factories

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. Tau-charm physics at B factories Stephen L. Olsen, Univ of Hawai’i Chinas workshop-2006 June 11-18, Beijing 馬 鵬

  2. BaBar and Belle e+ (3.5 GeV/c) e- (8 GeV/c) Peak luminosity 1.081034 cm–2s–1 Integrated luminosity 363 fb–1 Peak luminosity 1.621034 cm–2s–1 Integrated luminosity 602 fb–1 • Main purpose: Study CP violation in asymmetric e+e - (4S)  BB • Both experiments have far exceeded their design goals • Approx. 1 ab-1 integrated flux combined

  3. B Factories are t-charm factories On ECM (GeV) ~5M charm particles/fb-1 t+t-0.89 nb ~2M t’s/fb-1

  4. t-physics at B factories • Mt • Spectral functions • Non-strange & strange • Rare decays • Forbidden decays

  5. mt away from threshold Lafferty Charm 2006

  6. Precision t measurements t-  p-p0nt 79 fb-1

  7. Strange spectral function Path to world-best measurements of |Vus| and ms Belle

  8. Rare t decays Huge signals for t5pn decays limits on t7(8)pn decays

  9. LFV decays, t- m- g, ℓ-ℓ-ℓ+, etc Lafferty Charm 2006

  10. LFV limits from BaBar & Belle Lafferty Charm 2006 X10-7

  11. constraints from tmg limits Lafferty Charm 2006

  12. constraints from tmh limits Lafferty Charm 2006

  13. Future for LFV t decays

  14. Charm physics • Charmed particle spectroscopy • Rare decays • Form-factors • DDbar mixing

  15. Sources of charm at B-factories c • Continuum • D*-tagged • Recoil tags • B decays • Radiative return c c D d u p q D y D

  16. Old new charmed-strange particles BaBar BaBar

  17. BDs DsJ decays are spin filters J=0 J=?; m=0 J=0 B DsJ Ds DsJ(2460) DsJ(2317)J=0 DsJ(2460)J=1 Belle

  18. P –wave c-s mesons?

  19. Broad D** states found by Belle

  20. Masses coincide? See tak by Dmitrasinovic @ Charm 2006

  21. New new charmed-strange particles DsJ(2860)D0K+ BaBar

  22. Baryons, baryons, baryons.. Belle Belle c+- c+0 c++ Feeddown from c(2880)+ Signal c+sideband ISOTRIPLET!

  23. Rare FCNC charm decays FCNC decays only occur in loop diagrams in SM: New physics can introduce new particles into loop Some models increase BF(cull) to 10-6—10-5 18 Paul D. Jackson Charm 2006

  24. Unblinded Mass Distributions D+p+e+e– D+p+µ+µ– No signal for FCNC charm decays found Ds+K+e+e– Ds+K+µ+µ– Limits on yields extracted with unbinned likelihood fits Largest “signal” is ~1.5s in Lc+p+µ+µ–decays Lc+p+e+e– Lc+p+µ+µ– 24 Paul D. Jackson Charm 2006

  25. Branching Fraction Limits (preliminary) Upper limits on BF (x10-6) at 90% CL Improved limits in 17 modes, more than order magnitude in 12 modes 26 Paul D. Jackson Charm 2006

  26. Recoil-tagged Charmed mesons K p recoil p D*- K recoil pslow D0 „inverse“ fit recoil K/p+ e/µ- n p p  additional primary mesons IP 3.5 GeV e+ e- 8 GeV D* g p mass-constrained vertex fits D Ktag p  signal side  tag side L. Widhalm Charm06

  27. Form Factors – Comparison with Models Belle modified pole model D0 Kln lattice calculation ISGW2 model fit results simple pole D0 pln modified pole (poles fixed at theo. values) L. Widhalm Charm2006

  28. CLEO-c untagged with v-reconstruction Simple Pole Model Modified Pole Model I Shipsey Charm2006 D0→-e+ D0→-e+ Preliminary

  29. DDbar mixing using D*-tags

  30. DDbar mixing limits Covered by A Schwartz

  31. Particles with hidden charm

  32. Charmonium production in B decays J = 0 or 1 j=½ j=½ Spectator model says Jcc= 0 or 1 should dominate exclusive BK(cc) decays.

  33. charmonium states All sub-open-charm threshold states have been identified Discovered at B factories

  34. Allowed decays all have Bf~10-3 hcK 0.9 x10-3 J/yK 1.0 x10-3 J/yK* 1.4 x10-3 J/yK12701.8 x10-3 y’K 0.7 x10-3 y’K* 0.9 x10-3 cc0K 0.6 x10-3 cc1K 0.7 x10-3 BK cc(J=2) still not seen

  35. XYZ particles • X(3872) • p+p- J/y in BKp+p-J/y • Z(3930) • DD in gg DD • Y(3940) • wJ/y in BK wJ/y • Z(3940) • DD* in e+e- J/y DD* • Y(4260) • p+p-J/y in e+e-g p+p- J/y

  36. gg Z(3931) DD at Belle sin4q (J=2) 4111 evts (5.5) M=3931 4  2 MeV =208 3 MeV Matches well to cc2’ expectations

  37. Z(3931) is most likely the cc2’ 3931

  38. X(3940) e+e-J/y + DD* e+e-J/y + X Seen in DD* but not DD; this impliescc1’ or hc” but e+e-J/y +cc0 not seen

  39. Is the X(3940) the hc”? 3940 Mass is about 150 MeV too low

  40. X(3872) BK p+p-J/y y’p+p-J/y X(3872)p+p-J/y S.K. Choi et al PRL 91, 262001 M(ppJ/y)

  41. C=+1 is established X(3872)gJ/y seen in: M(pp) looks like a r (CDF) Belle X(3872)”w”J/y seen in Belle &

  42. angular analysis favors 1++ or 2 -+

  43. X(3872) has no obvious cc assignment hc” Mass & width way too small Angular dist. wrong 3872 cc1’ Mass & G(gJ/y) way too small Mass & width too small Angular dist wrong cc0’ h2 pp hc is allowed ppJ/y is isospin forbidden

  44. Y(3940) in BK wJ/y M≈3940 ± 11 MeV G≈ 92 ± 24 MeV G(Y3940 wJ/y)> ~7 MeV (an SUF(3)-violating decay) M(wJ/y) MeV S.K. Choi et al. (Belle) PRL94, 182002 (2005)

  45. Is the Y(3940) the cc1’ ? Y(3940)  w J/y enhanced by FSI ? w D Y FSI D* J/y It seems strange (to me) that an SU(3)-violating process can “short out” an SU(3)-allowed process If the Z(3930) is the cc2’ (which seems likely) the Y(3940) mass is too high for the cc1’

  46. Y(4260) 10.58 GeV M=4259  8 MeV G = 88  23 MeV 4.26 GeV not seen in s(e+e-hadrons) at Ecm =4.26 GeV Y(4260) BES s(e+e-hadrons) scc~5nb J/ sideband B. Aubert et al. (BaBar) hep-ph/0506081 J.Z. Bai et al. (BESII) PRL 88 101802 Well above DD & DD* threshold but wide & found in a suppressed mode??

  47. CLEO-c results on the Y(4260) PRL 96 162003 (2006) 58  12 pb G(Y4260)ppJ/y > ~1.8 MeV >10x higher than what we are used to

  48. DD** threshold in relation to the Y(4260) 4.26-mD

  49. Is the Y(4260) a hybrid? Expect distortions of p+p-J/y line shape DD0*0 DD0’0 DD1 No sign of YDD** “turn-ons”

More Related